Captain-Crash
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 25,046
- Reaction score
- 39,304
Lmao, we're just this close................................................smh
Having an unqualified GM has killed us the most.I’ve been thinking and contemplating about how our front office has built the roster over the last few seasons, and I think we need to talk about a worrying trend.
There’s no denying that the front office has shifted its philosophy. We used to be a pure "draft and develop" team that completely avoided external premium talent.
Recently, we’ve used trades as our version of premium free agency—giving up draft picks to bring in bigger names like Rashan Gary, Quinnen Williams, Joey Porter Jr. and George Pickens, or even veteran depth like Stephon Gilmore and Brandin Cooks a few years back.
Now, don't get me wrong: acquiring elite talent is always good. But I’m starting to worry that this strategy is quietly depleting our long-term foundation.
Here is why this "one person in, multiple future players out" approach might be hurting us more than we think:
I've always supported the trades because you are acquiring a "known commodity" vs an unknown prospect, but the more I think about it... Are these trades actually worth the long-term cost to our depth, or are we setting ourselves up for a major crash when the bill comes due?
- We are bleeding draft capital: To get these top-tier guys, we are constantly shipping off day-two and day-three draft picks.
- We are losing out on cheap rookie contracts.
- We aren't growing our own talent pool: We have a lot of names at the top, but our depth is entirely made up of bargain-bin, one-year free agents (think Eric Kendricks or Dante Fowler types over the years). Because we keep trading away picks, I'm starting to think we aren't drafting enough young players to actually develop. One veteran trade-in effectively deletes 2 to 3 young, homegrown developmental players from our pipeline.
Curious to hear what you guys think.
Having an unqualified GM has killed us the most.
Did you read the post? It's not even making a point that can be contradictory.This post is so contradicting of our fans who year in and out say we cant just grow off the draft but we need to sign more and trade for more players lol.
As most know, Jimmy had in his contract that he had final say in all football decisions so Jimmy was effectively our hc and GM, while Jerry was the figurehead GM.When Jimmy was winning, how was our GM?
Jimmy was great. Jerry had the title in name only. He should go back to that and put it in the next coach's Contract the same way he did with Jimmy.When Jimmy was winning, how was our GM?
Since Jimmy was the GM, he was great.When Jimmy was winning, how was our GM?
Jimmy was in charge of the roster and Jethro signed checks. Got that?When Jimmy was winning, how was our GM?
Of course. Why? Because good consistent players are generally not available for trade.What’s shocking is these players that Jerry trades for don’t play very good at all when they put on the Cowboys uniform.
Even among home grown talent the Cowboys have a big problem with "get paid, then fade" expensive contracts.What’s shocking is these players that Jerry trades for don’t play very good at all when they put on the Cowboys uniform.
Spot on.Of course. Why? Because good consistent players are generally not available for trade.
Mostly because we pay the wrong players.Even among home grown talent the Cowboys have a big problem with "get paid, then fade" expensive contracts.
And when we did get a good one in Q, he cost a ton.Spot on.
Teams don’t jettison the good ones.
Case in point..SF parts ways with Winters. No way they were cutting ties with Greenlaw and Warner.
Jimmy was in charge of the roster and Jethro signed checks. Got that?
As most know, Jimmy had in his contract that he had final say in all football decisions so Jimmy was effectively our hc and GM, while Jerry was the figurehead GM.
