Only in Dallas do they need so many leaders

[Kaiser]

I was hoping to put that towards some defense. Safety, LB, CB, DT? All needed at the time. Blowing that contract on their 5th option in the passing game is a luxury they really didn't have.

Agree on spending it on defense, but TWill did start in 2018 and have 53 catches. I wouldn't really call that the 5th option.

 

[Kaiser]

Sean Lee when healthy is a "leader".

So is DLaw, Jaylon Smith and Byron Jones.... but apparently they don't count.

 

[ESisback]

People have downplayed the lack of postseason success under Garrett while praising him for his regular season record. I would call that comfy with mediocrity.

I wouldn’t. The regular season is the foundation. Without a good foundation you don’t even get a SHOT at playoffs. Pointing out the many reasons we got stopped in the playoffs is NOT “making excuses”, and it’s NOT accepting it with an “aw shucks” indifference. The reasons varied—some was coaching or scheme, some was execution, some was injury, weather, officiating, dumb luck, etc.

 

[Kaiser]

What the Cowboys typically do in free agency is sign affordable players at areas of need so they don't go into the draft forced to go after a specific position.

Agree on the strategy, I would much rather they plug in guys like that than force picks like Jacob Rogers and Al Johnson.

But I do think Carroll was a disaster and Thornton was as well. I think the issue with Thornton was he just got fat and happy after his "set for life" contract and he quit putting out the effort.

 

[Kaiser]

I wouldn’t. The regular season is the foundation. Without a good foundation you don’t even get a SHOT at playoffs. Pointing out the many reasons we got stopped in the playoffs is NOT “making excuses”, and it’s NOT accepting it with an “aw shucks” indifference. The reasons varied—some was coaching or scheme, some was execution, some was injury, weather, officiating, dumb luck, etc.

Fans: "Dallas is 3-5 and will have a losing record for years"

Other fans: "Dallas finished 10-6 and made the playoffs"

Fans: "Dallas didn't win the Super Bowl"

Other fans: "Its a young team on its way up, there is plenty to like"

Fans: "Why do you love mediocrity!!??!!!"

 

[ESisback]

The guy who can't bear to hear that this team is doing somerhingwrong is being referred to as "triggered". If you're going to try to paint with that broad brush, at least bother to do so accurately.

—See, you’re “allowed” to say it anyway you want, but other views are “triggered”. I don’t think he’s triggered (for most people, that has a negative connotation), I just think he’d rather not waste any more time whining about his team not meeting his requirements. The whole know-it-all, I won’t accept losing, tough guy swagger induces eyerolls.


"Suckers" are those who buy in to everything without question. And then expect everyone else to do the same. You decide if you want to be that "sucker" or not, but don't tell me that I shouldn't question questionable decisions.

—-No one’s buying into everything without question. They’re just trying to be reasonable. Yeah, we’re frustrated by 23 years without a Super Bowl, but just because we’re not classifying the FO as clueless or the laughingstock DOESN’T mean we’re embracing mediocrity.



Then feel free to express your own unhappiness in any way that you see fit. And if other people talking about it in their own way proves to be too much for you to handle, feel free to skip over those threads.


—You can always skip over responding to “triggered” folks. They’re not as enlightened or knowledgeable as you—just suckers who embrace mediocrity.


Trying to pretend it's not happening sure is. You're free to cover your own eyes. The rest of us will keep ours wide open.

—-DARING to question your opinions isn’t exactly covering your eyes, is it?

 

[ESisback]

Wait wan't that the Lone Ranger's Horse

Silver. Trigger belonged to Roy Rogers!

 

[dallasdave]

Silver. Trigger belonged to Roy Rogers!

Hi Ho Silver

 

[408Cowboy]

Fans: "Dallas is 3-5 and will have a losing record for years"

Other fans: "Dallas finished 10-6 and made the playoffs"

Fans: "Dallas didn't win the Super Bowl"

Other fans: "Its a young team on its way up, there is plenty to like"

Fans: "Why do you love mediocrity!!??!!!"

Fans: Garrett has shown he can't take us any further. We won't win anything with him.

Fans: what are you talking about his win percentage is yadayadayada.

Fans: that's great but he can't get past the divisional round.

Fans: but he still wins a lot so we do win with him.

Fans: We're talking postseason here. He doesn't win then.

Fans: I didn't know you meant postseason but he still.....

I've had and seen conversations like that on this site. That's what I was referring to in my earlier post.

 

[Stash]

You ask how many leaders a team needs then go on to bring up guys like Crawford and Hurns and how much they make, I do not see either of them as a "leader". Sean Lee when healthy is a "leader". There was a time not so long ago we could not win a game without Lee on the field. Witten wasn't even around last year and signed for peanuts to return. So is this thread about too many leaders or players you think are overpaid?

Both actually. It’s about overpaying players who aren’t worth the cost, based upon the perceived premise that they are ‘leaders’ that the team cannot do without.

But ultimately, you get it.

 

[Stash]

Crawford plays the most snaps on DL most years. The other years he was top 2 in snaps other than one year when he was 3rd.

Tyrone Crawford is not a problem. Not finding players to take snaps away from him is a problem.

In 2018 he started multiple games at RDE but still played the 2nd most snaps at DT of any DT on the roster.

And still manages only backup player statistics. Therein lies the problem.

 

[Stash]

—-DARING to question your opinions isn’t exactly covering your eyes, is it?

Make a point then.

 

[ESisback]

Make a point then.

I already did, but you apparently missed it.

 

[Verdict]

How many "leaders" does a team need?

How many true "leaders" do the Super Bowl champs have? I count one - Tom Brady. The rest are replaceable parts who either get with the program or get lost.

How many guys does it take for a team to be successful? The Cowboys apparently need a whole lot, and all of that leadership somehow doesn't manage to keep the screwups from screwing up again and again and again, does it?

Only our Cowboys need to pay all of these players to be "team leaders". Players who don't actually contribute on the field when it truly matters, but cheerleaders who 'say' the right things, but can't actually 'do' those right things, or not anymore anyway.

I've never seen a team that apparently has such a leadership void that they need to overpay half of their roster because they're 'leaders'.

Oh yeah! Also don't forget passion. We needed to pay Dez for his "passion". Lol

 

[Verdict]

Take the 4 worst contracts on every team and tell me how that's different? I'll just stay in the conference.

NYG - Eli ($23), Vernon ($19.5), Jenkins ($14.75), Martin (5.9) = 63
PHI - Peters (13), Agholor (9), Bradham (9), Long (5.5) = 36.5
WAS - Norman (14.5), Reed (9.5), Brown (9), McCoy (3.5) = 36.5

NO - Jordan (14), Davis (8.5), Klein (6), Morstead (4) = 32.5
LAR - Brockers (11), Talib (8), Robey-Coleman (6), Hekker (4) = 29
SEA - Brown (11), Mingo (6), Mcdougald (5), Dickson (4) = 26

Every team carries around dead weight, or players who aren't worth their contracts, and it adds up to well over $20m. You want to release these guys to make space for the guys who are the bad contracts for other teams. It's ridiculous logic. It only makes sense if Dallas was tight to the cap, but they're not even close.

Well, to be fair, I don't think he is suggesting we get rid of bad contracts to add more bad contracts. Lol. I think he is saying get rid of all these dead weight contracts and replace them with performing contracts.

 

[Verdict]

It implies no such thing. It points out that none of it matters whatsoever. None of it translates to wins on the field, so none of it matters at all.

But you and the other SuperFans will try to defend every stupid move this team decides to make like it's your job.

None of the 'leadership' that this team is paying for means a damn thing. Sean Lee, Crawford, Hurns, and now Witten are no longer difference makers, if they ever were. And none of that 'leadership' makes up for the fact that they can't play and aren't worth what they're being paid.

I know the truth hurts. And that's why you're obviously triggered.

Well I don't know if he is triggered or not. Maybe more of a state of denial or nostalgia. Lee and Witten are done. Hurns may not be done, and I was somewhat bullish on the signing initially, but the return on investment on that contract was poor last year so I am not stuck on staying with a bad decision or a bad contract.

 

[Kaiser]

I've had and seen conversations like that on this site. That's what I was referring to in my earlier post.

I wasn't responding to your posts, it was more about the moving goalposts in the OP. Your summary is a fair one, I think that is where a lot of people fall on the issue. My complaint is with the minority that can't acknowledge there has been progress or that there is real upside with his team.

 

[ESisback]

We have several players that are paid WAY too much for their contribution to the team. But every team does.

In the case of Sean Lee, yes, his contract needs redone. IMHO, he still has value to the team, but freeing up a few million to be put to better use is warranted.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

How many "leaders" does a team need?

How many true "leaders" do the Super Bowl champs have? I count one - Tom Brady. The rest are replaceable parts who either get with the program or get lost.

How many guys does it take for a team to be successful? The Cowboys apparently need a whole lot, and all of that leadership somehow doesn't manage to keep the screwups from screwing up again and again and again, does it?

Only our Cowboys need to pay all of these players to be "team leaders". Players who don't actually contribute on the field when it truly matters, but cheerleaders who 'say' the right things, but can't actually 'do' those right things, or not anymore anyway.

I've never seen a team that apparently has such a leadership void that they need to overpay half of their roster because they're 'leaders'.

the patriots because of their success are measuring stick for everybody else. although, you say Tom Brady is the only leader on that team, and as a player that maybe true, but don't forget bilicheck. he is the true leader of that team, it starts and ends with him. to that point how many coaches can be compared to him and have that kind of aura about them?

also how many other teams have a single leader who experience the success that patriots have? I think in this regard because of bilicheck they are the exception than the rule. even when dallas won 3 superbowls, there were multiple leaders on the team, Aikman, Smith, Irvin and Johnson. other teams who have won superbowls have similar structure. so I wouldn't criticize dallas for having so many leaders.

 

[Stash]

the patriots because of their success are measuring stick for everybody else. although, you say Tom Brady is the only leader on that team, and as a player that maybe true, but don't forget bilicheck. he is the true leader of that team, it starts and ends with him. to that point how many coaches can be compared to him and have that kind of aura about them?

You're absolutely right, and that's how it should be. Belicheck has enough leadership himself that he only need Brady among his players.

also how many other teams have a single leader who experience the success that patriots have? I think in this regard because of bilicheck they are the exception than the rule. even when dallas won 3 superbowls, there were multiple leaders on the team, Aikman, Smith, Irvin and Johnson. other teams who have won superbowls have similar structure. so I wouldn't criticize dallas for having so many leaders.

And these leaders you mentioned were all highly productive starters, not the backup/part timers we're grossly overpaying now. That's a key part of my point. They're obviously not being paid according to their on-field contributions.