Latest Cowboy rumor

[Sydla]

Okay, so what your saying is that if a trade doesn't materialize, and they don't like anyone else on the board for the exception of Zeke, because it too soon to take a running back they should just let the clock expire and not pick anyone?

I've been clear that if there is no QB available and Ramsey is gone and they can't trade down, they should take Tunsil over Elliott or Bosa.

But I've also said it's possible they could take Elliot but then that would be because they felt boxed into a corner and panicked a bit.

 

[Aliencowboy]

This is interesting. Seems like Zeke is a win now pick and the coaches are in that boat whereas the front/office and scouts may be looking at the overall future investment.

 

[jday]

I disagree
I like Elliott but let's don't get carried away with his talent. He would not have been the top back last year or next year. His biggest asset is he can be a 3 down player. i think if most any team could get one of 3 or 4 of this years rb's and another pick too, they would pass on Elliott. He's a good player, and I would consider him after a trade down but not at 4. A trade down gets you him and another player

I've seen this argument parroted throughout the zone just about everywhere the Zeke conversation comes up. And personally I think it is a ridiculous way to argue against taking him. The NFL is not a comparison contest. We don't line up all running backs and put them through drills to win games. The question is what that particular player would mean to the particular team that drafts him. Zeke would be an awesome fit. Sure I like Gurley and Fournette. Who doesn't. I'm sure they too would have success here. But they aren't options to us. The real question is how Zeke compares to everyone else available in this year draft when the Cowboys are on the clock and moreover what type of impact he will have for the team that drafts him. Behind the Cowboys offensive line, Zeke would be a monster. Explain to me how 1 player on defense helps the whole team like Zeke.

 

[reddyuta]

This is interesting. Seems like Zeke is a win now pick and the coaches are in that boat whereas the front/office and scouts may be looking at the overall future investment.

This win now thing is such utter bull****.everything they have done in FA this season and the past season indicate a they are not in win now mode.the Broncos were in win now mode for 3 years and they spent so such in FA.

 

[Sydla]

I've seen this argument parroted throughout the zone just about everywhere the Zeke conversation comes up. And personally I think it is a ridiculous way to argue against taking him. The NFL is not a comparison contest. We don't line up all running backs and put them through drills to win games. The question is what that particular player would mean to the particular team that drafts him. Zeke would be an awesome fit. Sure I like Gurley and Fournette. Who doesn't. I'm sure they too would have success here. But they aren't options to us. The real question is how Zeke compares to everyone else available in this year draft when the Cowboys are on the clock and moreover what type of impact he will have for the team that drafts him. Behind the Cowboys offensive line, Zeke would be a monster. Explain to me how 1 player on defense helps the whole team like Zeke.

And I've seen the argument that somehow you have to pair an elite back with this OL to fully get everything you can out of the OL. I think that's bogus. There's a law of diminishing returns here. This OL turned Murray into an 1800 yard back. Well, shoot, if Elliott is that much better than Murray, I guess we should expect 2500 yards a year from Elliott.

Oh that's unrealistic? Probably is. But it highlights the fact that investing a high pick in an elite back probably won't have the return some of you think it will. How much better do you really think Elliott would be over the season Murray had in 2014? It would likely have to be pretty substantial to cover up the holes we have on defense.

 

[WillieBeamen]

If both QBs are gone and we have no offers to trade down, take Tunsil. When it comes to having to pay him, i'd rather go cheap at RB than cheap on the OL.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

another tweet that appears to echo the one in here already...

Patrik Walker ‎@VoiceOfTheStar
I heard same. Lynch losing ground. Zeke gaining. Bosa right there. Ramsey trying to fend everyone off. https://twitter.com/skinwade/status/722526846319927296 …

 

[cowboys1985]

My personal preference changes by the week. Right now I'm not as high with QB @ #4 just because to my naked eye, I don't think their generational talents. I feel like Goff and Wentz are future above average (11-15) QBs. Which is good but doesn't make this a must draft QB with #4 pick. The reason I say that is from most reports the Rams traded up to No.1 because they were desperate to make a splash with Fisher on the hot seat and them moving to L.A. On top of that a QB desperate team like the Browns supposedly are willing to trade back. I don't think you would hear that if these were franchise QB prospects.

I would be excited with any of Tunsil, Elliot, Jack (assuming the medical reports are in fact false), Ramsey or a trade down. (Perhaps you can nab Spence in the middle of RD1 while picking up a couple extra RD2 and then using 2 RD2 picks to move back into the 1st to get Lynch).

Bosa wouldn't excite me but I would be intrigued to see how it plays out. Our run D was as bad as our lack of pass rush. Additions of Bosa along with Thornton would go a long ways in fixing it. This could Potentially it could setup with a formidable DL with Lawrence and Bosa at your DE spots.

To wrap it up as long as we either take BPA or get good value in a trade down I'll be happy. I just don't want to end up reading something after the fact that Wentz was their 20th player on their board but they felt like they had to get a QB so they take him at #4 or that they had Elliot rated the highest but didn't believe in 1st Rd RBs so they passed on him.

 

[ConceptCoop]

So in the past few days I've read we would be dumb to draft with our no4 pick:

A) Bosa- reach on a DE without the quick twitch to be an elite pass rusher. He's good but not a difference maker. We just took Greg Ellis at no4?!

C) Ramsey - You don't win with a secondary, you win in the trenches. He's a S and not even the best CB in the draft. Did we not learn from the Claiborne debacle?

Not directed at you, just the portions of the board making these particular claims.

A) Bosa had the fastest 3 cone and 20 yd shuttle times at the combine. Both are aimed at measuring stop and start quickness.

B) Seattle wins with secondary, Arizona wins with secondary, and Denver's was as impressive as their front 7. It's no accident that AZ, SEA, CAR and DEN have the best secondaries in the league and won a ton of games between them.

Also, most paid analysts think Ransey is a CB and the best in the draft at that. Sure, he can play safety and that might even be a more natural fit. But as just a CB he's a very high end prospect.

 

[jday]

And I've seen the argument that somehow you have to pair an elite back with this OL to fully get everything you can out of the OL. I think that's bogus. There's a law of diminishing returns here. This OL turned Murray into an 1800 yard back. Well, shoot, if Elliott is that much better than Murray, I guess we should expect 2500 yards a year from Elliott.

Oh that's unrealistic? Probably is. But it highlights the fact that investing a high pick in an elite back probably won't have the return some of you think it will. How much better do you really think Elliott would be over the season Murray had in 2014? It would likely have to be pretty substantial to cover up the holes we have on defense.

No, no, no. People look at where Murray was drafted and assume that you can easily find another Murray in latter rounds based on that success. There were reasons why Murray fell and lack of ability was not one of them.

The truth is the relationship between offensive line and running back is much like the relationship between clown fish and anemone's. It is a symbiotic relationship. Both have to do their job and do so well to yield positive returns. This thinking that you can plug any running back back there and have success is ridiculous. Sure, a guy with speed, like McFadden is going to eat well when everything is clean. Transversely, a great back behind a mediocre line is going to have opportunities. But the difference between those marriages and marriage where both sides contribute is consistent winning.

See Vikings with AP
See Lions with Barry Sanders

See Browns with the various no names that have passed through there despite having a good line.

And then see the Cowboys of the 90's and more recently 2014.

It really isn't rocket science people.

 

[JeffInDC]

So in the past few days I've read we would be dumb to draft with our no4 pick:

A) Bosa- reach on a DE without the quick twitch to be an elite pass rusher. He's good but not a difference maker. We just took Greg Ellis at no4?!

B) Goff/Wentz - take a qb with a no4 pick who is not a generational talent and you already have a high priced qb on your roster. Theres not much of a drop off to Lynch. We are wasting away an opportunity to get an impact player to put you over the top. We were a catch away from the NFC championship game and we drafted a backup?!!

C) Ramsey - You don't win with a secondary, you win in the trenches. He's a S and not even the best CB in the draft. Did we not learn from the Claiborne debacle?!

D) Jack - Aleardy have Lee and Mclain. This guy has big time medical red flags. You can't risk that with the no4 pick. His knee is a ticking time bomb!!

E) Elliot - No way we can take rb at no4. You can take a stud rb later on in the draft. Do we know nothing about value? Even Emmitt Smith said not to take a rb at no4!!

F) Tunsil - We spent way to much resources in our OL. We won't be able to keep it together when they come up for new contracts. Law of diminishing returns. What good does a dominant OL do if we don't have a defense. We need sacks and TOs!!

It must be the final days before draft. The meltdown with whoever we pick is gona be epic. CAN'T WAIT!

Thank you. I almost want us to take the QB so we can watch Zeke go to the Eagles or Giants and gash Dallas' D for over 100 ypg and win OROY, or see Bosa go anywhere but here and get 8-10 sacks and win DROY, or Ramsey go to whomever and show that he IS a Patrick Peterson clone............while we sit and wait for one of the QB's to HOPEFULLY be the man in 2-3 years when Romo retires. This team needs so much more than a QB, and I've always had the mindset that the #4 pick in the draft NEEDS TO BE an instant impact type player. Everyone talks about GB stashing Rodgers - they had that luxury because they had been a playoff team the previous 4 years. Dallas doesn't have that luxury when the 2 QB's being bandied around are NOT being talked about as consensus STUDS.

 

[StarBoyz83]

This win now thing is such utter bull****.everything they have done in FA this season and the past season indicate a they are not in win now mode.the Broncos were in win now mode for 3 years and they spent so such in FA.

Exactly. Theyre just fielding a team.

 

[kazzd58]

Elliott is not taking this team to the SB in 2016. Because the defense isn't good enough to be a SB defense. People significantly overrate the effect Elliott (or any TB for that matter) would have on this team, a team that has some serious holes on defense. A good running game can only protect a defense for so long.

And you are proving my point. You are right, Murray wasn't as good as Elliott coming out of college. And yet with the investment in this OL, they turned Murray into the leading rusher in the league.

I don't think McFadden and Morris are our TBs for the next 3-4 years either. But I also know that with this OL, you can probably more easily plug and play TBs than any other position on the team.

Some of yall's argument about the defense and so many holes which is true we can get better but acting like our defense sucked last year is a bit much to me and that just wasnt the case if you look at the situation we were in as a team with no starting QB,WR,CB for most/all season all top players at there position on our team...

There's only so much you can do and get away with if your out on the field for way to long and how many 3 and outs this offense have last yea?r which kept this defense who by the way kept the scores close untill the 4th qtr for the most part even when our qb cldnt make a couple plays that sustain drives and let them rest a lil it was every game all season long without Romo

So to me thats how i saw last season for us, so our defense i think will be ok and can keep developing and building in 2nd round and so on cause Zeke is our best defense Big picture winning now ijs

but while we are still developing and building lets help them out in the process by keeping them off the field as much as possible furhter keeping them fresher for those 4th qtr moments to end games.

 

[Sydla]

No, no, no. People look at where Murray was drafted and assume that you can easily find another Murray in latter rounds based on that success. There were reasons why Murray fell and lack of ability was not one of them.

The truth is the relationship between offensive line and running back is much like the relationship between clown fish and anemone's. It is a symbiotic relationship. Both have to do their job and do so well to yield positive returns. This thinking that you can plug any running back back there and have success is ridiculous. Sure, a guy with speed, like McFadden is going to eat well when everything is clean. Transversely, a great back behind a mediocre line is going to have opportunities. But the difference between those marriages and marriage where both sides contribute is consistent winning.

See Vikings with AP
See Lions with Barry Sanders

See Browns with the various no names that have passed through there despite having a good line.

And then see the Cowboys of the 90's and more recently 2014.

It really isn't rocket science people.

The Cowboys of the 90s won because they had a COMPLETE team. They didn't win SBs because they had a great TB and a great OL that covered up for shortcomings in other areas of their team. So people should really stop using the 90s Cowboys as the blueprint here and trying to compare an Ezekiel Elliott led Cowboys in 2016 to them. They are nothing alike. And the 2014 team? They weren't good enough to win a SB, even with a dominant run game. Why? Because their defense wasn't good enough to win a SB.

You've spent resources in building the best OL in football that turned a 3rd round pick into the league's leading rusher and then took a bum in McFadden and turned him into a 1,000 yard rusher in essentially 12 games with no passing threat whatsoever. Pretty strong evidence that you can put forth a very good running game without having to invest a prime pick in a TB.

The wise move is to continue to try to build up the defense with prime assets because that's the road that makes this a super bowl team, not taking a TB that probably won't be as dominant as you think and can't cover up defensive holes when you get into the playoffs and face great teams.

 

[Sydla]

Some of yall's argument about the defense and so many holes which is true we can get better but acting like our defense sucked last year is a bit much to me and that just wasnt the case if you look at the situation we were in as a team with no starting QB,WR,CB for most/all season all top players at there position on our team...

There's only so much you can do and get away with if your out on the field for way to long and how many 3 and outs this offense have last yea?r which kept this defense who by the way kept the scores close untill the 4th qtr for the most part even when our qb cldnt make a couple plays that sustain drives and let them rest a lil it was every game all season long without Romo

So to me thats how i saw last season for us, so our defense i think will be ok and can keep developing and building in 2nd round and so on cause Zeke is our best defense Big picture winning now ijs

but while we are still developing and building lets help them out in the process by keeping them off the field as much as possible furhter keeping them fresher for those 4th qtr moments to end games.

Interesting that you would bring up no QB and WR and use that as evidence to claim the defense was better than we think but then ignore the fact that on the other side of the ball, this OL turned a bum TB into a 1,000 yard rusher when there was no threat from your QB or WRs over that stretch.

I mean if we are going to be using the QB and WR missing time in this analysis, let's do it all around. If one is to conclude that the defense will be better when Romo and Bryant are back and totally healthy, is it a stretch to think that with Romo and Bryant back the running game will also be that much better and therefore, we don't necessarily need to take Elliott?

Here's the reality. QB or no QB the defense has some pretty big holes. They don't cover well and they don't rush the passer well. And if you can't do at least one of those things, in today's NFL, you aren't going to likely do well in the postseason.............. you can think that somehow Zeke Elliott is the perfect blend of Zeus, Jesus Christ and Eric Dickerson rolled into one tailback and can cover all that up but I think that's pretty lofty thinking.

 

[morasp]

If they do take him that makes 6 of our last 8 first round picks going for offense, one of them a running back. That means we've come full circle on RB and haven't used a single first round pick on the front seven of the defense.

 

[stilltheguru88]

If they do take him that makes 6 of our last 8 first round picks going for offense, one of them a running back. That means we've come full circle on RB and haven't used a single first round pick on the front seven of the defense.

We don't need a front seven guy in round 1. This is a deep dline draft. Round 2/3 can net a good dt.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Not sure if I am necessarily on board as of this moment, but I can absolutely see why the coaches feel the way they feel. Their best chance of keeping Romo upright is having an elite back that can scare defenses on every play, get tough yards on 3rd and short and protect Romo when he drops back. Elliot has the skillset that could potentially make him better than Murray ever was in this offense.

 

[Floatyworm]

Brugler mentioned early this morning on CBS Sports radio that Garrett and Linehan are "making a push" for Elliot.

Which just shows the complete disconnect between the front office and this coaching staff. Might as well just fire Garrett and crew right now....and save the fans the #$%% show the 2016-17 season is going to be.

 

[StarHead69]

We don't need a front seven guy in round 1. This is a deep dline draft. Round 2/3 can net a good dt.

It's a trust issue for me. If it's not Bosa or Ramsey at #4, I can see this playing out like last year with the RB's, where we skip obvious fits/needs because they weren't the best 'Value'. Then at the end of the day we have another gaggle of injured/pothead guys who will never end up seeing the field.