McCray tendered

[jnday]

Perhaps you should learn the subtle, yet significant, distinction between saying someone is a great player, and saying someone is a great SPECIAL TEAMS players. Seriously, it's not that difficult.

Several posters have give you examples of great special teams players such as Bill Bates. McCray is not a great player in any area. It doesn't take much for you to use the "great" label. The Cowboys fanbase has lowered their standards to comical levels in an attempt to feel good about scrub players. Just stop it.

 

[Proximo]

Several posters have give you examples of great special teams players such as Bill Bates. McCray is not a great player in any area. It doesn't take much for you to use the "great" label. The Cowboys fanbase has lowered their standards to comical levels in an attempt to feel good about scrub players. Just stop it.

Whether he's "great" in any way, shape, or form has no relevance here, because he's not getting "great player" money by receiving a tender that's not even guaranteed. He's a solid special teams player that can be serviceable on the defense when used properly.

 

[jnday]

Dude just give it up already. There is nothing wrong with the McCray deal. It's an unguaranteed tender whereby they can basically just bring him in to compete in camp and cut him if 1) he doesn't play well enough to make the cut, or 2) they need the cap space to sign someone else. THAT IS WHY IT'S A GOOD DEAL. They can cut him if needed and it won't result in dead money.

He's a proven asset to the special teams. If he can make the cut, fine. I'm not saying he's great in any capacity. If you think my point is that I "support subpar talent on the roster" then your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. My point is, and was, that this is a smart deal for the team because they have nothing to lose and it won't result in dead weight. Not only that, but you fail to acknowledge the fact that the team is installing a completely new defensive scheme this year. Has it occurred to you that perhaps Monte has watched the tape and has a more suitable role for him on the actual defense than what Rob Ryan did?

You are right on one point. Several more posters gave up on you getting the point much earlier in the thread and so should I. It has nothing to do with cost and everything to do with keeping a subpar player that can only help on special teams. Kiffin can't change that.

 

[Proximo]

You are right on one point. Several more posters gave up on you getting the point much earlier in the thread and so should I. It has nothing to do with cost and everything to do with keeping a subpar player that can only help on special teams. Kiffin can't change that.

Dude you continue to refuse to directly answer any of the points I've brought up. And by the way, every team in the league has players on their roster that will contribute only on special teams with little to no chance of getting time in the starting lineup. So with that being said it's obvious your above post proves no point whatsoever.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I actually think this is a good move. McCray wasn't great last season at safety but he's a young player. He can get better. Not saying he's starting material but for a key special teamer and a guy to fill in here and there? I see no problem? McCray was a decent safety for us before he was asked to play more snaps.

 

[Eskimo]

The point that many of us are trying to make here in regards to McCray is that this is not a player worth tying up resources for. If we want him back we can try and give him a minimum contract and save a few bucks in the process. At this stage McCray has proven himself to be a decent ST player and a horrible Safety who has very little ability and virtually no projection to get better. This is a guy who wasn't even good enough to play defense on his college team and yet there he was starting at Safety for us for most of the year and stinking up the place.

McCray is a guy who you invite to camp but not one who you waste resources upon so that you get the right to match any offers he receives. This contract will make him count on the rule of 51 so he will hamstring us given how close we are to the cap limit presently.

This was a move we didn't need to make. This is a franchise run by someone who knows he can't recognize NFL caliber talent. There is no reason to think we couldn't get a UDFA senior off a major college team who couldn't put up a better season than Danny McCray just did. That's how bad of a safety he is, IMO.

The thing that scares me most about the signing is that I believe it signals the FO believes he represents adequate depth to lock down the Safety position assuming we can find a starter in FA or the draft to play beside Church.

 

[jnday]

The point that many of us are trying to make here in regards to McCray is that this is not a player worth tying up resources for. If we want him back we can try and give him a minimum contract and save a few bucks in the process. At this stage McCray has proven himself to be a decent ST player and a horrible Safety who has very little ability and virtually no projection to get better. This is a guy who wasn't even good enough to play defense on his college team and yet there he was starting at Safety for us for most of the year and stinking up the place.

McCray is a guy who you invite to camp but not one who you waste resources upon so that you get the right to match any offers he receives. This contract will make him count on the rule of 51 so he will hamstring us given how close we are to the cap limit presently.

This was a move we didn't need to make. This is a franchise run by someone who knows he can't recognize NFL caliber talent. There is no reason to think we couldn't get a UDFA senior off a major college team who couldn't put up a better season than Danny McCray just did. That's how bad of a safety he is, IMO.



The thing that scares me most about the signing is that I believe it signals the FO believes he represents adequate depth to lock down the Safety position assuming we can find a starter in FA or the draft to play beside Church.

At least somebody gets it. Thank you Eskimo.

 

[Typhus]

The point that many of us are trying to make here in regards to McCray is that this is not a player worth tying up resources for. If we want him back we can try and give him a minimum contract and save a few bucks in the process. At this stage McCray has proven himself to be a decent ST player and a horrible Safety who has very little ability and virtually no projection to get better. This is a guy who wasn't even good enough to play defense on his college team and yet there he was starting at Safety for us for most of the year and stinking up the place.

McCray is a guy who you invite to camp but not one who you waste resources upon so that you get the right to match any offers he receives. This contract will make him count on the rule of 51 so he will hamstring us given how close we are to the cap limit presently.

This was a move we didn't need to make. This is a franchise run by someone who knows he can't recognize NFL caliber talent. There is no reason to think we couldn't get a UDFA senior off a major college team who couldn't put up a better season than Danny McCray just did. That's how bad of a safety he is, IMO.

The thing that scares me most about the signing is that I believe it signals the FO believes he represents adequate depth to lock down the Safety position assuming we can find a starter in FA or the draft to play beside Church.

Eerie,,, you just hit on everything that I deeply feared the most about the McCray signing. Im starting to get that inexplicable feeling of uneasiness again about the FO, but I still find comfort in my denial.

 

[burmafrd]

Dude you continue to refuse to directly answer any of the points I've brought up. And by the way, every team in the league has players on their roster that will contribute only on special teams with little to no chance of getting time in the starting lineup. So with that being said it's obvious your above post proves no point whatsoever.

yawn.

 

[Shiloht88]

Terrible GM Jerry wasting cap space and a roster spot on a Jag he over values. Typical

 

[cowboyvic]

Terrible GM Jerry wasting cap space and a roster spot on a Jag he over values. Typical

Yep! and it's been going on for years.

 

[Stash]

The point that many of us are trying to make here in regards to McCray is that this is not a player worth tying up resources for. If we want him back we can try and give him a minimum contract and save a few bucks in the process. At this stage McCray has proven himself to be a decent ST player and a horrible Safety who has very little ability and virtually no projection to get better. This is a guy who wasn't even good enough to play defense on his college team and yet there he was starting at Safety for us for most of the year and stinking up the place.

McCray is a guy who you invite to camp but not one who you waste resources upon so that you get the right to match any offers he receives. This contract will make him count on the rule of 51 so he will hamstring us given how close we are to the cap limit presently.

This was a move we didn't need to make. This is a franchise run by someone who knows he can't recognize NFL caliber talent. There is no reason to think we couldn't get a UDFA senior off a major college team who couldn't put up a better season than Danny McCray just did. That's how bad of a safety he is, IMO.

The thing that scares me most about the signing is that I believe it signals the FO believes he represents adequate depth to lock down the Safety position assuming we can find a starter in FA or the draft to play beside Church.

This was an awesome post, you nailed it.

Thank you.

 

[Stash]

Whether he's "great" in any way, shape, or form has no relevance here, because he's not getting "great player" money by receiving a tender that's not even guaranteed. He's a solid special teams player that can be serviceable on the defense when used properly.

Uh, no.

That's just not accurate at all.

"1.5 Yards per snap allowed in coverage by Danny McCray, the most of all safeties on the field for 50% of their teams' snaps."

In no way, shape, or form is that "serviceable".

 

[Mr Cowboy]

The point that many of us are trying to make here in regards to McCray is that this is not a player worth tying up resources for. If we want him back we can try and give him a minimum contract and save a few bucks in the process. At this stage McCray has proven himself to be a decent ST player and a horrible Safety who has very little ability and virtually no projection to get better. This is a guy who wasn't even good enough to play defense on his college team and yet there he was starting at Safety for us for most of the year and stinking up the place.

McCray is a guy who you invite to camp but not one who you waste resources upon so that you get the right to match any offers he receives. This contract will make him count on the rule of 51 so he will hamstring us given how close we are to the cap limit presently.

This was a move we didn't need to make. This is a franchise run by someone who knows he can't recognize NFL caliber talent. There is no reason to think we couldn't get a UDFA senior off a major college team who couldn't put up a better season than Danny McCray just did. That's how bad of a safety he is, IMO.

The thing that scares me most about the signing is that I believe it signals the FO believes he represents adequate depth to lock down the Safety position assuming we can find a starter in FA or the draft to play beside Church.

You nailed it!

Why would you give $1.3 million to a player who will play 10-12 plays per game. And you hope that half of those are on kick offs where the kick goes beyond the end zone. Makes no sense to tie up that much money against the cap.

If McCray isn't tendered, the Cowboys would be closer to $5 million over the cap instead of over $6+ million.

You can get the next McCray the same place you got this one, as an UDFA, at a million dollars less.

 

[big dog cowboy]

The rueage in this thread is unbelievable.

 

[jnday]

This was an awesome post, you nailed it.

Thank you.

He done a much better job of getting our point across than I did. I wasted most of the night trying to get blind men to see.

Why does these fans have such a hard time see any Cowboy player move own? McCray is a scrub at best, but they hate to cut ties. Jerry holds on to players too long and I think some of that mentality rubs off on the fanbase. To have a poster say that the McCray deal is good for the team and they should have more deals like his, is wrong on every level when building a quality team. Our fanbase loves these 8-8 seasons.

 

[jterrell]

He done a much better job of getting our point across than I did. I wasted most of the night trying to get blind men to see.

Why does these fans have such a hard time see any Cowboy player move own? McCray is a scrub at best, but they hate to cut ties. Jerry holds on to players too long and I think some of that mentality rubs off on the fanbase. To have a poster say that the McCray deal is good for the team and they should have more deals like his, is wrong on every level when building a quality team. Our fanbase loves these 8-8 seasons.

McCray is by far our best special teams cover player.

He is not a scrub any more than Bill Bates was. Good teams have valuable special teamers. Something we learned under Jimmy Johnson.

1.3M is NOT a lot of money. Not when his base would be over 500k anyway.

Only the truly pathetic talent managers would suggest you not tender quality, reliable players so you can hope and pray to find an undrafted free agent to do the job.

With a 123m cap if you can not pay your best special teams cover guy 1.3m million you have serious problems with both cap mgmt and common sense.

 

[TheRomoSexual]

He done a much better job of getting our point across than I did. I wasted most of the night trying to get blind men to see.

Why does these fans have such a hard time see any Cowboy player move own? McCray is a scrub at best, but they hate to cut ties. Jerry holds on to players too long and I think some of that mentality rubs off on the fanbase. To have a poster say that the McCray deal is good for the team and they should have more deals like his, is wrong on every level when building a quality team. Our fanbase loves these 8-8 seasons.

This is the exact type of post I'm referring to. Someone disagrees with your panic over a 1.3 mil dollar tender, and all of a sudden those who aren't jumping off the bridge are "blind" and love mediocrity.

 

[Stash]

With a 123m cap if you can not pay your best special teams cover guy 1.3m million you have serious problems with both cap mgmt and common sense.

That much seems obvious.

Especially when talking about a mediocre 8-8 team currently $6 million over the cap.

 

[jterrell]

That much seems obvious.

Especially when talking about a mediocre 8-8 team currently $6 million over the cap.

Whether we win 19 games next year or 4 Danny McCray won't be anywhere near a top ten list for most overpaid Cowboy.

The salary cap changes a great deal under the new CBA. Dallas must adjust. Teams overall must adjust to paying QBs less money. Teams with veteran "franchise QBs" are invariably tight against the cap.