It Would be Dumb to Draft a QB in the 1st This Year

[Sydla]

That isn't a real board but if I had to pick I take Lynch in a heartbeat.

Who cares if it's a real board or not? It is just an exercise to show how some of you are letting emotion cloud sound judgment.

For years, some of you killed Jones for often going need over BPA. Now you want him to possibly ignore BPA (unless of course at their pick they have Lynch or Goff rated as their top guy on the board at that point) and grab a QB in the Top Ten because you think that's the only place you can grab a QB.

It's very simple. The Cowboys should only take a QB in the Top 6, where I think they will pick, if that's where they have the QB slotted. In no way, shape or form, should they just panic and grab a QB that they don't even think is a Top Ten prospect.

 

[bodi]

Tunsil

 

[Nightman]

Who cares if it's a real board or not? It is just an exercise to show how some of you are letting emotion cloud sound judgment.

For years, some of you killed Jones for often going need over BPA. Now you want him to possibly ignore BPA (unless of course at their pick they have Lynch or Goff rated as their top guy on the board at that point) and grab a QB in the Top Ten because you think that's the only place you can grab a QB.

It's very simple. The Cowboys should only take a QB in the Top 6, where I think they will pick, if that's where they have the QB slotted. In no way, shape or form, should they just panic and grab a QB that they don't even think is a Top Ten prospect.

We had what most called 3 first round picks last year......how did that work out???

It is a QB driven team and league......period

 

[darthseinfeld]

It wouldn't be stupid because at #6 Lynch or Goff would be BPA. Both should carry a top 5 grade. They shouldnt be graded #1 overall, but they should definitely be graded Top 5

 

[JoeyBoy718]

We had what most called 3 first round picks last year......how did that work out???

It is a QB driven team and league......period

Yep. And QB is the only position you should reach on. I don't mean spend the #1 overall on a guy who would go in the 4th round. But if you have to pick a guy half a round early just to be safe, you better do it if it has a chance to secure the next 15 years of your organization. You want the best possible QB you can get. Not a good QB, not even a very good QB, but the best QB you can realistically get because they're are only a hand full of QBs good enough to lead a team on his own. Let's assume Romo does play another 3 years at a high level. That means you need to draft a QB within the next 3 drafts. And let's assume our team wins a lot of games under a healthy Romo. That means we'll be picking late in the 1st round in the next two drafts if everything goes according to plan. So the question is simple. Can we get a better QB this year with likely a top 5 pick than we could in the next two years with a 25-32 pick? If the answer is yes, you take your guy this year. Not to mention, playing behind Romo for 3 years should make him a much better QB than if we drafted someone with the 32nd pick 3 years from now and expected them to start as a rookie. So you can give your whole "Well, he's not a top 6 talent" argument, but don't go crying in 3 years saying "Why didn't we address QB when we had a chance?"

 

[waving monkey]

Yep. And QB is the only position you should reach on. I don't mean spend the #1 overall on a guy who would go in the 4th round. But if you have to pick a guy half a round early just to be safe, you better do it if it has a chance to secure the next 15 years of your organization. You want the best possible QB you can get. Not a good QB, not even a very good QB, but the best QB you can realistically get because they're are only a hand full of QBs good enough to lead a team on his own. Let's assume Romo does play another 3 years at a high level. That means you need to draft a QB within the next 3 drafts. And let's assume our team wins a lot of games under a healthy Romo. That means we'll be picking late in the 1st round in the next two drafts if everything goes according to plan. So the question is simple. Can we get a better QB this year with likely a top 5 pick than we could in the next two years with a 25-32 pick? If the answer is yes, you take your guy this year. Not to mention, playing behind Romo for 3 years should make him a much better QB than if we drafted someone with the 32nd pick 3 years from now and expected them to start as a rookie. So you can give your whole "Well, he's not a top 6 talent" argument, but don't go crying in 3 years saying "Why didn't we address QB when we had a chance?"

I think you summed it up nicely

 

[Sydla]

We had what most called 3 first round picks last year......how did that work out???

It is a QB driven team and league......period

How'd it work out?

It worked out pretty well from a talent perspective. It looks like all three will end up being very good to great players.

 

[Sydla]

It wouldn't be stupid because at #6 Lynch or Goff would be BPA. Both should carry a top 5 grade. They shouldnt be graded #1 overall, but they should definitely be graded Top 5

According to you.

We have no idea if the Cowboys will have these guys ranked high, low, whatever.

Look, I don't have an issue with the Cowboys taking a QB in the Top Ten at all. As long as that player is viewed by the Cowboys as being a Top Ten talent on their board. I reject the notion that you have to take a QB regardless of where he's slotted because you need a QB. A Top Ten pick is too valuable to screw around with need over BPA, especially on a team that could use a talent upgrade at just about every position on the team except OL and maybe DE if Hardy is back.

 

[mattjames2010]

Haha, some of you would be fired in a week if you were GMs.

We will likely have a top 10 pick, possibly a top 5, and we're here talking about reaching for a player. If we are picking in the top 5, there is a possibility of there being two great OT prospects along with a great CB/S prospect. Both are great value in the top 5 along with being a need. If we fall into the top 10, there will be a highly touted WR, CB, LBs, and DTs. All of which could rank higher on our boards. There is absolutely no need to reach for a QB, even if it's a small reach, if another player is available and ranked higher on the board.

Personally, I like the OT prospects far more than the two QB prospects this year. Free's replacement needs to be addressed, Green simply isn't someone to put your faith in at the moment. This is a solid opportunity to fill that hole left by Free with a top 10 talent at the tackle position. It's also going to be tough to pass up on someone like Treadwell if we are picking in the top 10, a 6-2 monster that could line up on the other side of Dez. Not to mention, Hargreaves is probably the best pure CB prospect in the draft and will most likely be there when we pick.

Too many great prospects in the top 10 to reach on a QB or any other position.

 

[4lifecowboy]

Yep. And QB is the only position you should reach on. I don't mean spend the #1 overall on a guy who would go in the 4th round. But if you have to pick a guy half a round early just to be safe, you better do it if it has a chance to secure the next 15 years of your organization. You want the best possible QB you can get. Not a good QB, not even a very good QB, but the best QB you can realistically get because they're are only a hand full of QBs good enough to lead a team on his own. Let's assume Romo does play another 3 years at a high level. That means you need to draft a QB within the next 3 drafts. And let's assume our team wins a lot of games under a healthy Romo. That means we'll be picking late in the 1st round in the next two drafts if everything goes according to plan. So the question is simple. Can we get a better QB this year with likely a top 5 pick than we could in the next two years with a 25-32 pick? If the answer is yes, you take your guy this year. Not to mention, playing behind Romo for 3 years should make him a much better QB than if we drafted someone with the 32nd pick 3 years from now and expected them to start as a rookie. So you can give your whole "Well, he's not a top 6 talent" argument, but don't go crying in 3 years saying "Why didn't we address QB when we had a chance?"

Well said.

 

[4lifecowboy]

Haha, some of you would be fired in a week if you were GMs.

We will likely have a top 10 pick, possibly a top 5, and we're here talking about reaching for a player. If we are picking in the top 5, there is a possibility of there being two great OT prospects along with a great CB/S prospect. Both are great value in the top 5 along with being a need. If we fall into the top 10, there will be a highly touted WR, CB, LBs, and DTs. All of which could rank higher on our boards. There is absolutely no need to reach for a QB, even if it's a small reach, if another player is available and ranked higher on the board.

Personally, I like the OT prospects far more than the two QB prospects this year. Free's replacement needs to be addressed, Green simply isn't someone to put your faith in at the moment. This is a solid opportunity to fill that hole left by Free with a top 10 talent at the tackle position. It's also going to be tough to pass up on someone like Treadwell if we are picking in the top 10, a 6-2 monster that could line up on the other side of Dez. Not to mention, Hargreaves is probably the best pure CB prospect in the draft and will most likely be there when we pick.

Too many great prospects in the top 10 to reach on a QB or any other position.

Taking Lynch or Goff in the top 10 is not a reach. By virtue of the importance of their position alone they are more valuable.

 

[mattjames2010]

Taking Lynch or Goff in the top 10 is not a reach. By virtue of the importance of their position alone they are more valuable.

Their "value" is dependent on how you view them as a prospect. This is exactly why I started out my post by stating some of you would never last as GMs. If they are automatically more valuable, they'd be the first and second picks in the draft. As of right now, scouts tend to believe there are players at other positions that are more valuable than these two. Now, maybe the combine changes this, but I doubt it.

If they fall out of the top 5 in most scout's eyes and we draft them when we have a top 5 pick, it's a reach when there are other players that are considered better prospects at positions we also have a need for at the moment.

 

[Sydla]

Taking Lynch or Goff in the top 10 is not a reach. By virtue of the importance of their position alone they are more valuable.

No offense, but this is pretty absurd and why teams get into trouble when they take a guy like Christian Ponder or EJ Manuel earlier than they should............

You take Goff or Lynch in the Top Ten if you deem them to be Top 10 players. It's that simple.

We don't know how the Cowboys will value those two at this point.

 

[4lifecowboy]

No offense, but this is pretty absurd and why teams get into trouble when they take a guy like Christian Ponder or EJ Manuel earlier than they should............

You take Goff or Lynch in the Top Ten if you deem them to be Top 10 players. It's that simple.

We don't know how the Cowboys will value those two at this point.

No offense but we aren't arguing about taking a 2 teir QB in the 1st round, we are debating if we should take one of the top 2 QBs with our first-round pick. I'm of the thinking that this season was an unfortunate fluke, which fortunately has put us in a position to take a legitimate shot at taking our future franchise player. The chances of us being in this position in the next few years again are slim. So my question to you is why would put ourselves in a position in the future to be taking a Ponder or Manuel too high out of desperation when opportunity is in our face right now?

 

[Nightman]

How'd it work out?

It worked out pretty well from a talent perspective. It looks like all three will end up being very good to great players.

Haha, some of you would be fired in a week if you were GMs.

We will likely have a top 10 pick, possibly a top 5, and we're here talking about reaching for a player. If we are picking in the top 5, there is a possibility of there being two great OT prospects along with a great CB/S prospect. Both are great value in the top 5 along with being a need. If we fall into the top 10, there will be a highly touted WR, CB, LBs, and DTs. All of which could rank higher on our boards. There is absolutely no need to reach for a QB, even if it's a small reach, if another player is available and ranked higher on the board.

Personally, I like the OT prospects far more than the two QB prospects this year. Free's replacement needs to be addressed, Green simply isn't someone to put your faith in at the moment. This is a solid opportunity to fill that hole left by Free with a top 10 talent at the tackle position. It's also going to be tough to pass up on someone like Treadwell if we are picking in the top 10, a 6-2 monster that could line up on the other side of Dez. Not to mention, Hargreaves is probably the best pure CB prospect in the draft and will most likely be there when we pick.

Too many great prospects in the top 10 to reach on a QB or any other position.

What team do you GM for?

Adding position players is great but we are 4-9 because our QB got hurt and we had no backups.

We cannot go thru that again. Romo only has a couple-three years left and now is the time to find a replacement with a Top 5 pick.

If you 2 don't value Lynch and Goff that is really not important. Someone does and that creates the value. If DAL truly doesn't think they are NFL QBs they should trade the picks to someone who does and try again next year.

Which Franchise RTs and CBs are 6-8 win players?

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Listen, I know It's the easy conclussion to come to. After all, Romo being out almost the entire year certainly left a bitter taste. Our backup situation is unacceptable and Romo is certainly no spring chicken. That's just it though, our backup situation is unacceptable. No QB we draft will be a capable number 2.

We need to, as fans, sit down and make a pros and cons list. I have and the cons outweigh the pros. I cannot overstate the importance the role of the new rookie contract rules plays in this. We can assume we will draft in a similar spot as when we drafted Mo. He got just over 4 million per year on his 4 year deal. Do you want to pay a rookie backup 4 million?

Even worse than that, everyone wants us to groom Romo's heir. That's just not the NFL we live in. Stop pointing to Rodgers. He got a 5 year deal paying 1.5 mil per year. Notice I said 5 years... We can no longer do 5 year deals.

So here is a hypothetical for you: Romo plays 3 more years and then retires. Good, you have a 1st rounder waiting in the wings, right? Well, yes, except with very little game tape to judge you now have to decide, before he even starts his first season as starter, to give him a 5th year option worth 10+ million, or risk him having a good year and being a UFA. That is what is called a lose-lose. It's Miles Austin and Doug Free all over again, but worse. Unless the cowboys are willing to cut Romo after 2017 regardless if he is "done" or not it is a bad move to draft a QB in the first.

This QB class is mediocre at best. These players are more Locker, Ponder, or Gabbert, not Newton, Luck, or even Winston or Mariota. They are the kind of QBs a team who doesn't have a QB gambles on. Were not one of those teams and in this modern NFL you shouldn't draft a 1st round QB unless you haven't a QB at all.

We need a backup, so let's pay a backup. Lets get a Hasselbeck, or a Fitzpatrick. It's like you have an iPhone 5s. The iPhone 6s comes out next month. You don't buy the iPhone 6 because you're worried your phone might die. You hope it lasts the month and if it doesn't you borrow a friend's old phone to get you until the iPhone 6s comes out. Phones are too expensive these days.

Oh... A devils advocate thread,


The draft is always a complete crap shoot. More fail than succeed.

There is absolutely no way to "pre" determine the quality of this draft... The QB class. No way. None.

 

[Sydla]

No offense but we aren't arguing about taking a 2 teir QB in the 1st round, we are debating if we should take one of the top 2 QBs with our first-round pick. I'm of the thinking that this season was an unfortunate fluke, which fortunately has put us in a position to take a legitimate shot at taking our future franchise player. The chances of us being in this position in the next few years again are slim. So my question to you is why would put ourselves in a position in the future to be taking a Ponder or Manuel too high out of desperation when opportunity is in our face right now?

Just because these guys might be the two best QBs IN THIS DRAFT doesn't mean you have to take them in the Top Ten if the team deems them to not be Top Ten talents.

Why is this such a hard concept to grasp? The Cowboys must evaluate these two QBs strictly on their ability to play and where they would rank in the overall pecking order of players they like in this draft. If at their pick, Goff or Lynch is the highest or one of the highest players on their board............. you take him. If neither is well thought of by the organization and they have other players on their board they like much better, you take that player.

People are just assuming Top Ten Pick + Needing a QB = You have to take one of the two QBs in this draft.

No they don't. Not if they don't believe either kid really is a future #1 QB in this league.

 

[Sydla]

What team do you GM for?

Adding position players is great but we are 4-9 because our QB got hurt and we had no backups.

We cannot go thru that again. Romo only has a couple-three years left and now is the time to find a replacement with a Top 5 pick.

If you 2 don't value Lynch and Goff that is really not important. Someone does and that creates the value. If DAL truly doesn't think they are NFL QBs they should trade the picks to someone who does and try again next year.

Which Franchise RTs and CBs are 6-8 win players?

Or if you think Robert Nkemdiche is the next dominant DT in the league, you stay at your pick and you take him. The Cowboys will have options. One of those might be trading down. One might be taking the best player on their board who can make an immediate impact. And one might be taking one of the QBs because they have them high on their board.

One thing missing in all this analysis by the people who are pounding the table that the Cowboys have to take a QB because he's more valuable than any other position player............... the Cowboys just might not like either guy that much. Or even beyond that, they like a kid like Wentz more and will roll the die and see how the draft board shakes out.

 

[mattjames2010]

What team do you GM for?

Adding position players is great but we are 4-9 because our QB got hurt and we had no backups.

We cannot go thru that again. Romo only has a couple-three years left and now is the time to find a replacement with a Top 5 pick.

If you 2 don't value Lynch and Goff that is really not important. Someone does and that creates the value. If DAL truly doesn't think they are NFL QBs they should trade the picks to someone who does and try again next year.

Which Franchise RTs and CBs are 6-8 win players?

Why is it that you guys think a ROOKIE QB is going to come in and win us games? Wilson and Luck are not the norm. You're not thinking rationally, this is emotion based. A rookie QB wasn't going to be much of a difference.

We are locked into Romo for at least another 2 years. You get a quality backup in here during the offseason and give them training camp and time behind Romo to learn this offense.

QB is not a NEED at this point. IF Cowboys believe one of the two top prospects are our future, draft them. But don't get all pissy when they choose to pass on them.

 

[Nightman]

Why is it that you guys think a ROOKIE QB is going to come in and win us games? Wilson and Luck are not the norm. You're not thinking rationally, this is emotion based. A rookie QB wasn't going to be much of a difference.

We are locked into Romo for at least another 2 years. You get a quality backup in here during the offseason and give them training camp and time behind Romo to learn this offense.

QB is not a NEED at this point. IF Cowboys believe one of the two top prospects are our future, draft them. But don't get all pissy when they choose to pass on them.

Stop being so emo. Breathe.

We should do both. Draft one early and sign a vet that can win a game or 5. And sign a project in UDFA or late in the draft.

Do it all.

ps- you still didn't say who you GM for