It was one pick, not armageddon!

[Yakuza Rich]

well, I mean, you don't HAVE to watch..

You're right. I do have other things I can do. The beach is awfully fine in September.





YR

 

[tyke1doe]

Completely missing the point. The question is, does the team have a draft philosophy and process that will lead to consistent success, and if so, do they stick to that process? The pick at 4 strongly suggests that the answer to at least that second question is no. It's not about one pick. It's about what that pick says about our entire approach to the draft.

With all due respect, this is contradictory. If it's not about one pick, then what are you guys whining about? Over the past four years, we have taken players who have contributed mightily to this team, even taking offensive linemen three of the past four years prior to this year.
We HAVE a process, and that process is to take the best player available.

Second, no man-made rule is etched in stone. There should always be conditions to account for the unexpected. That is part of the process also. So if there is that transitional player who doesn't fit the process - whatever that's supposed to mean, and I'm really still not clear - then you adjust the process to accommodate that player.

If Zeke was the highest player on our board, then I feel better. But at least some have reported that Ramsey was, in which case we ignored our board and went for the shiny bauble.

Who are these some you speak of?
So let me see if I've got this straight: You are upset because the Cowboys - who actually had their choice between Ramsey and Elliott - chose Elliott. But because some anonymous insider believes they had Ramsey higher, you think they didn't choose their highest rated player, even though Jerry has already come out and said Elliott was their highest ranked player?

I think the issue is that YOU and OTHERS had Ramsey higher and projected that on the Cowboys. Then when the Cowboys didn't pick Ramsey, it gave you reason to criticize the pick and the organization.

Let's cut the bull. This is not simply about wondering if the Cowboys picked the best player. It's about fans being upset because Jerry Jones owns the team, employs football experts to make decisions on behalf of the team yet didn't have the NERVE to ask Cowboys fans their opinion of who they should take - as if fans are more knowledgeable of the needs of the team than those who know the inside of the organization and team through experience and daily contact with every aspect of the team.

 

[BulletBob]

You are comparing apples and a porterhouse.

Our dip in points form 2014 to 2015 had absolutely nothing to do with our rushing ability.

Nor did it have anything to do with a lack of a safety/corner back.

Now, if we could just draft a miracle-worker/injury healer, we'd be set.

 

[CowboyRoy]

2nd round and later is where you look to fill needs and give more weight to position. Top 5 picks in the draft are cornerstone players. Second round, third round ect are not.

LOL.......ah ok. So you dont draft for need with the first pick, but you do for all the rest? I guess that suits your argument.

I would argue that it is just the opposite. If you are picking in the top 5, there is most likley going to be a blue chip stud at several positions. So you have the luxury of choosing the position you most need.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

And let's make definitive statements about the selection of Ezekiel Elliott at #4 as a "bad decision" when we can't see the future of Ezekiel Elliott or all the other players we passed up to take him. That doesn't sound like a smart thing to do either.

Most liked the Claiborne pick when it first happened and look how that turned out?

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

People are justifying taking a RB at 4 as a move the helps Romo win now, but then you throw in the team's bargain-hunting free agent approach and efforts to move back into the 1st to draft Lynch, and it continues to show that if a Front Office that has no idea who this team is and what this team needs.

Also, I've never seen another team constantly try to justify their draft picks by saying so-and-so was about to draft him or was trying to trade up for him. They also like to talk about the player they tried to go get but couldn't. Why? It's like they know they are frauds and want to spin it. I hope teams will take it easy on our back-up QB because we really tried hard to get Lynch.

We needed a RB and a QB. They got one and tried to get another. I'm more impressed with them than I usually am.

 

[erod]

You are comparing apples and a porterhouse.

Our dip in points form 2014 to 2015 had absolutely nothing to do with our rushing ability.

Our rushing ability was purely based on empty yards in garbage time of the season. Couldn't run when it mattered.Couldn't finish runs.

Just massively upgraded the run game.

 

[superonyx]

LOL.......ah ok. So you dont draft for need with the first pick, but you do for all the rest? I guess that suits your argument.

I would argue that it is just the opposite. If you are picking in the top 5, there is most likley going to be a blue chip stud at several positions. So you have the luxury of choosing the position you most need.

Clearly you can understand the difference between the top 5 picks in the first round and a second or 3rd round selection. Its not about suiting my argument. Its an actual strategy teams use to make sure they don't pass up on cornerstone level players due to trying to fill a need. You can disagree with the strategy or pretend you cant understand the difference between top 5 picks and later picks. Your argument is based on all players being pretty much the same so you should just pick the one who plays a position you feel you need the most today.

You believe Elliott will not have any greater impact on the team than if they drafted Bosa, Ramsey, Buckner ect... You may not agree that a RB can contribute more to the success of the team a safety does. The later rounds is where need becomes very important when deciding who to draft since at that point in the draft the gamble is naturally greater and the hit percentages will be lower.

The team evaluated many players and the guys calling the plays and working with our players everyday felt the Elliott was a big enough upgrade and had some clear advantages over the other options in the first round.

Who are we to say the FO who has developed a pretty good hit rate on first round picks in the last few years is doing it all wrong.

 

[tyke1doe]

Most liked the Claiborne pick when it first happened and look how that turned out?

Yeah, okay. And many didn't like the Martin pick and preferred Johnny Manziel instead, and look how that turned out?

 

[superonyx]

With all due respect, this is contradictory. If it's not about one pick, then what are you guys whining about? Over the past four years, we have taken players who have contributed mightily to this team, even taking offensive linemen three of the past four years prior to this year.
We HAVE a process, and that process is to take the best player available.

Second, no man-made rule is etched in stone. There should always be conditions to account for the unexpected. That is part of the process also. So if there is that transitional player who doesn't fit the process - whatever that's supposed to mean, and I'm really still not clear - then you adjust the process to accommodate that player.



Who are these some you speak of?
So let me see if I've got this straight: You are upset because the Cowboys - who actually had their choice between Ramsey and Elliott - chose Elliott. But because some anonymous insider believes they had Ramsey higher, you think they didn't choose their highest rated player, even though Jerry has already come out and said Elliott was their highest ranked player?

I think the issue is that YOU and OTHERS had Ramsey higher and projected that on the Cowboys. Then when the Cowboys didn't pick Ramsey, it gave you reason to criticize the pick and the organization.

Let's cut the bull. This is not simply about wondering if the Cowboys picked the best player. It's about fans being upset because Jerry Jones owns the team, employs football experts to make decisions on behalf of the team yet didn't have the NERVE to ask Cowboys fans their opinion of who they should take - as if fans are more knowledgeable of the needs of the team than those who know the inside of the organization and team through experience and daily contact with every aspect of the team.

Wow!
I cant imagine you will get a reply to that whipping.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Clearly you can understand the difference between the top 5 picks in the first round and a second or 3rd round selection. Its not about suiting my argument. Its an actual strategy teams use to make sure they don't pass up on cornerstone level players due to trying to fill a need. You can disagree with the strategy or pretend you cant understand the difference between top 5 picks and later picks. Your argument is based on all players being pretty much the same so you should just pick the one who plays a position you feel you need the most today.

You believe Elliott will not have any greater impact on the team than if they drafted Bosa, Ramsey, Buckner ect... You may not agree that a RB can contribute more to the success of the team a safety does. The later rounds is where need becomes very important when deciding who to draft since at that point in the draft the gamble is naturally greater and the hit percentages will be lower.

The team evaluated many players and the guys calling the plays and working with our players everyday felt the Elliott was a big enough upgrade and had some clear advantages over the other options in the first round.

Who are we to say the FO who has developed a pretty good hit rate on first round picks in the last few years is doing it all wrong.

Who is FO?

Anyway..........Like I said, its quite simple. The top 5 picks have blue chip players at several positions. So you have the luxury of picking the blue chipper at a position of need. And rounds 2 and 3 there are less blue chip players so you need to forego need and simply take the BPA. You do understand what "blue chip" players means?

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Our rushing ability was purely based on empty yards in garbage time of the season. Couldn't run when it mattered.Couldn't finish runs.

Just massively upgraded the run game.

9 of the top 10 rushers in the NFL last year had more garbage yards than Mcfadden.

 

[superonyx]

Who is FO?

Anyway..........Like I said, its quite simple. The top 5 picks have blue chip players at several positions. So you have the luxury of picking the blue chipper at a position of need. And rounds 2 and 3 there are less blue chip players so you need to forego need and simply take the BPA. You do understand what "blue chip" players means?

FO= Front Office

You want to just group players into Blue Chip or not Blue Chip.

There are other levels. The highest rated player on your board should be rated as cornerstone or franchise player.
If a group of players are rated as solid starter or potential pro bowler and another is rated as cornerstone or franchise player, then you have to go with the franchise player.

Its just hard to accept that the FO (Front Office) had Zeke rated above everyone else isn't it?

 

[HellCrowe]

A lot of people are just trying to make sense of what didn't happen and why it didn't go there way and why selling their soul to the devil didn't get them their pick. It happens s every year. Let's get through the draft and we can start the season

 

[CowboyRoy]

FO= Front Office

You want to just group players into Blue Chip or not Blue Chip.

There are other levels. The highest rated player on your board should be rated as cornerstone or franchise player.
If a group of players are rated as solid starter or potential pro bowler and another is rated as cornerstone or franchise player, then you have to go with the franchise player.

Its just hard to accept that the FO (Front Office) had Zeke rated above everyone else isn't it?

Yah, its hard for me to accept when most of the other people had Ramsey rated higher. Then there are the other factors to consider:

-We could get a great back in rounds 2 and 3
-It would be rare to get a stud defensive player in rounds 2-3
-RB's last about 5 years in this league
-CB's can go 10 years
-Money and draft picks are better spent on the corner then the RB
-defense was a much bigger need than RB was.

 

[ICP]

Okay, 7-9. Can't wait to see Garrett clapping.





YR

I was thinking 6-10

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

would a Jalen Ramsey or DeForrest Buckner have really improved our defense that dramatically this year?

This is the wrong question. The question that should be asked is:

Would it have been better to sign Miller for less cap and still have had the 4th overall to take an impact player or is it better to use that 4th on Zeke?

 

[rwalters31]

Unlikely.

I'll call and rise you one. With Romo in we have been doing 8-8 three times and 12-4 once. Without him for most of the year we were 4-12. My money is on 8-8 and rise you again that Romo does not last the year. The good money is riding on me!!

 

[superonyx]

This is the wrong question. The question that should be asked is:

Would it have been better to sign Miller for less cap and still have had the 4th overall to take an impact player or is it better to use that 4th on Zeke?

That's not the only question then.
Would it have been better to sign multi time pro bowl Safety Eric Weddle or use the 4th overall pick on a safety/corner with 3 career interceptions in over 40 games?

 

[percyhoward]

We had more garbage yard time in 2014 than 2015. @percyhoward

People either don't realize how good this OL is, or don't think it matters much.

Rushing yards in one-score games
as a percentage of total rushing yards
2015 McFadden 80.6%
2014 Murray 63.6%