Is it foolish to even consider RB in round 1?

[reddyuta]

I don't think teams look at drafting a player, then in 4 or 5 years planning they will let him walk. You take the player if you feel he helps you now and for future years. It's business, and when the contract is up, you deal with it at that time. you take a player thinking he will be here for 10 years, regardless of position.
You need to take him while he is there if he helps your team now.

But I agree with others, we can still get a RB in round 2 or 3.

in theory this is the right approach but RBs get beat up a lot and guys who look great in college flame out completely,I would not draft a RB in the first at all even though i like both Gurley and Gordon who are projected to go in the first rd.

 

[DTown214]

No, it isn't foolish at all. In fact, it's common sense to take one in the first after losing Murray.

 

[skinsscalper]

Honestly, I don't think this team is in any position to be greedy. At this point, any position could be upgraded (sans QB, LT, C, RG) in this draft. Take the BPA and move on. I don't care if it's RB, WR, DT, DE, CB. Take the best guy that falls into your lap and move on to round 2.

 

[erod]

Hardy is a one-year rental, so no position is off the table.

 

[JohnsKey19]

But I agree with others, we can still get a RB in round 2 or 3.

True but a lot of it depends on how the draft develops in front of us. All it takes is 1-2 teams to make an unexpected pick which may start an early run of RBs being selected.

If either Gurley/Gordon is on the board, they're very likely to be BPA at that point in the draft and you take one. If not, a DL/CB/LB will be BPA and you take one. Move on to round 2.

 

[BiffWellingtonIII]

Yes we need a DE & DT badly

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Maybe, maybe not.....but...

Even if the RB is BPA, even if you think the RB fits your scheme, even if the RB looks like a workhorse, even if the RB seems capable of producing as Murray did with over 1,500 yards, the real question is this:

When using a first round pick, is part of that pick's value that you hope he will be part of your team for close to a decade? We just proved that, even with a RB who leads the league in rushing and is viewed as the heart and soul of your newfound toughness, we aren't going to sign him to a second contract because while we value him, we are not willing to pay market value on a RB.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that philosophy. I actually support allowing Murray to walk. But that begs the question: even if Gurley or Gordon are exactly what we think they are and will star at RB, will the Cowboys spend a first round pick on a star RB for only 4 years? Having the RB is great, but if your philosophy and structure is such that you will not pay a star RB what a star RB commands in FA, does that perhaps prevent the Cowboys from pulling the trigger on a RB in round 1?

If no, then they don't mind the idea of using a 1st round pick on RB every 4 years if he's the BPA, and the first round pick is all about saving money on star RBs. Otherwise, why do it this year?

If yes, then how they use their first round pick aligns more with their offseason philosophy regarding RB. Let's face it, even with Gurley or Gordon, what are the odds that in 4 years they rush for 1,850 yards and lead the league. If we let a guy walk with those numbers, surely we let anyone with less walk too, right?

No agenda....just question about whether or not the Cowboys are seriously even considering using a first rounder on a RB, and what that might mean 4 years from now if they are consistent with their current philosophy.

Discuss?

Being that our first round pick IS JUST LIKE an early 2nd round pick (holla @USMarineVet ) ;-) I would say we probably take Gurley or our next highest rated back.

I think that the backs go before then... So we go DE... Hopefully!

 

[xwalker]

Maybe, maybe not.....but...

Even if the RB is BPA, even if you think the RB fits your scheme, even if the RB looks like a workhorse, even if the RB seems capable of producing as Murray did with over 1,500 yards, the real question is this:

When using a first round pick, is part of that pick's value that you hope he will be part of your team for close to a decade? We just proved that, even with a RB who leads the league in rushing and is viewed as the heart and soul of your newfound toughness, we aren't going to sign him to a second contract because while we value him, we are not willing to pay market value on a RB.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that philosophy. I actually support allowing Murray to walk. But that begs the question: even if Gurley or Gordon are exactly what we think they are and will star at RB, will the Cowboys spend a first round pick on a star RB for only 4 years? Having the RB is great, but if your philosophy and structure is such that you will not pay a star RB what a star RB commands in FA, does that perhaps prevent the Cowboys from pulling the trigger on a RB in round 1?

If no, then they don't mind the idea of using a 1st round pick on RB every 4 years if he's the BPA, and the first round pick is all about saving money on star RBs. Otherwise, why do it this year?

If yes, then how they use their first round pick aligns more with their offseason philosophy regarding RB. Let's face it, even with Gurley or Gordon, what are the odds that in 4 years they rush for 1,850 yards and lead the league. If we let a guy walk with those numbers, surely we let anyone with less walk too, right?

No agenda....just question about whether or not the Cowboys are seriously even considering using a first rounder on a RB, and what that might mean 4 years from now if they are consistent with their current philosophy.

Discuss?

In general, you get more value drafting the premium positions in the 1st. For example compare the Dez vs Murray contracts. A big contract for Murray was 8M per while Dez likely turned down 12M per. The rookie contract is the same regardless of position, therefore drafting top WR is getting you a 12M+ type player while drafting a top RB is getting you and 8M type player.

Having said that, the top goal of the 1st round should be to get an All-Pro type player (see Zack Martin) regardless of position. Gurley has All-Pro type talent and is the best RB in the draft since Peterson. I don't think anybody would pass on Peterson at #27.

 

[erod]

Yes we need a DE & DT badly

So does every team.

 

[Risen Star]

So does every team.

Huh?

 

[BiffWellingtonIII]

So does every team.

No

 

[Spectre]

Maybe, maybe not.....but...

Even if the RB is BPA, even if you think the RB fits your scheme, even if the RB looks like a workhorse, even if the RB seems capable of producing as Murray did with over 1,500 yards, the real question is this:

When using a first round pick, is part of that pick's value that you hope he will be part of your team for close to a decade? We just proved that, even with a RB who leads the league in rushing and is viewed as the heart and soul of your newfound toughness, we aren't going to sign him to a second contract because while we value him, we are not willing to pay market value on a RB.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that philosophy. I actually support allowing Murray to walk. But that begs the question: even if Gurley or Gordon are exactly what we think they are and will star at RB, will the Cowboys spend a first round pick on a star RB for only 4 years? Having the RB is great, but if your philosophy and structure is such that you will not pay a star RB what a star RB commands in FA, does that perhaps prevent the Cowboys from pulling the trigger on a RB in round 1?

If no, then they don't mind the idea of using a 1st round pick on RB every 4 years if he's the BPA, and the first round pick is all about saving money on star RBs. Otherwise, why do it this year?

If yes, then how they use their first round pick aligns more with their offseason philosophy regarding RB. Let's face it, even with Gurley or Gordon, what are the odds that in 4 years they rush for 1,850 yards and lead the league. If we let a guy walk with those numbers, surely we let anyone with less walk too, right?

No agenda....just question about whether or not the Cowboys are seriously even considering using a first rounder on a RB, and what that might mean 4 years from now if they are consistent with their current philosophy.

Discuss?

There is the possibility that they believe Murray's success is the result of the players around him, and less likely to be able to repeat such success on his own moving forward. That he may have been something of a one-year wonder. I'm inclined to agree. Whereas a Gurley or Gordon might be capable of doing more with less, and for a longer period.

 

[CF74]

Put me down for its more a luxury than a necessity at this point. I'd rather go defense...

 

[robjay04]

If we don't take a back in the first either at our pick or trading back in the early second then all of the top backs will likely be gone by the time we pick again. I'm not saying that we NEED to draft a back but if Gurley is there, you take him because he will be the BPA and will give our offense a legitimate playmaker and will likely have the best chance to be an impact player out of anyone who is available int he late first. Gurley would be the perfect fit and if not for the injury concerns, he would never come close to the bottom of the first. If the pick isn't Gurley then you go defense and roll the dice and hope you get lucky and a legitimate back falls to us in the second.

For those acting like a new RB isn't urgent, please look at our roster.

McFadden---Old for a RB, massive underachiever with glaring injury concerns.

Randle---The guy is one bad piece of press away from being out of the NFL and we should rely on him? He would probably be viewed as the guy right now if not for his immaturity but I predict he is not on the roster week one.

Williams---Probably the best out of the bunch IMO but can't be viewed as anything other than a younger version of McFadden right now. He has not had any real game action since 2012 and hasn't really been good when he has seen the field.

Dunbar should not even be discussed in this conversation because he would never fit our offensive style as a full time threat. RB is a GLARING hole considering how heavy we will emphasize the run. Sure our OL will open some holes but the back still matters.

 

[Bullflop]

The elite DEs and DTs will be seriously evaporated by the time our pick comes due at #60. I think there's a real possibility that our needs at those positions should take precedence over our wants at RB in round one.

Yes, we'll have some talent in the presence of Lawrence and later on in Hardy. However, that is hardly enough to sustain a defense that will still be sorely lacking in those areas early-on in the upcoming season.

Resolving a crying need at DT and DE should also bear more impact than any difference a first round RB choice would probably provide. There's an abundance of outstanding RB talent to be had this year. A great pick should still be available to us in round two in the event the C'boys decide to serve their defense in round one.

 

[DCBoysfan]

I just hope Dallas gets a player that can come in and make an impact in round 1, if that player is a RB then so be it.

 

[DFWJC]

I could go either way, but my preference is to take a RB in one of the following rounds. There should be good ones (time may prove, even better ones) available in rounds 1-4.

But if we have a RB staring at us at 27 that we have rated way higher than anyone else on the board, good drafting says to take him or trade down.

Bottom line is that first rounder should make a difference for your team.

 

[JBS]

You guys are acting like all rbs are equal

Sure, if the guy you are drafting is a one contract player...someone who you run into the ground and get rid of, cough...Murray...cough...

You don't take that guy in round one

But not every back falls in that category...if you have a chance at getting a special player...a player who is capable of carrying the load and sustaining that level of play for upwards of 7+ years...then absolutely, you take that guy in round one

Guess what? Gurley is that guy

Nobody else in this class is....

 

[robjay04]

I just hope Dallas gets a player that can come in and make an impact in round 1, if that player is a RB then so be it.

You guys are acting like all rbs are equal

Sure, if the guy you are drafting is a one contract player...someone who you run into the ground and get rid of, cough...Murray...cough...

You don't take that guy in round one

But not every back falls in that category...if you have a chance at getting a special player...a player who is capable of carrying the load and sustaining that level of play for upwards of 7+ years...then absolutely, you take that guy in round one

Guess what? Gurley is that guy

Nobody else in this class is....

POST OF THE YEAR!

Even when Romo retires, an offense consisting of Gurley/Dez is an offense worth reckoning with.

 

[Zekeats]

Every player and every situation is different. Murray finally stayed healthy and finished his first full season of the year in his contract year. This isn't Emmitt, Barry, Tomlinson or AP....if it was we would have gotten the deal done. Murray was a dime a dozen and that is why we couldn't commit the $.