Peter King MMQB on Dallas draft weekend - Talks about the Paxton ,Ogbah and J.Smith situations

[visionary]

A direct quote from the article.

I should never be surprised by the opinions on this board. Although there are some opinions that outright shock me. Hell, some of them are mine.

But the idea some brought to the table prior to the draft the Dallas running game wasn't the lynchpin to the success of 2014 was truly amazing. To the point for a brief moment I questioned what I knew. Yet there is no chance of getting away from the truth the running game benefited the passing game and the defense.

And after seeing all the players and coaches and GMs, and even what the team accepts as fact, I wonder where those folks are who put pencil to paper and did some statistical analysis to come away with an opinion contrary to not only what people in football were saying, but the most basic truth to what this game is about.

Moving the chains, staying ahead of third down, controlling the ball and clock, and protecting the defense, as most teams do.

Here it is, the way the team, along with most people associated with this game think about Elliott versus Ramsey. It's basic logic.

I agree completely about the run game

Fact us the run game is WAY more important than some on this board would care to admit

I wasn't a fan of the Zeke pick at 4 (would have traded down) but over Ramsey that was an easy choice.

One other note from this article is that it us clear that coaches have WAY too much input in the draft. This is largely because the GM has no idea what to do and had no direction or plan and has no basis in football knowledge to make that decision. That is very unfortunate.

Also, I was SHOCKED, that Peter King never mentioned the true architect of our team, Will McClay. Clearly King did not have REAL access lol

 

[Sydla]

Did he misrepresent the opinion of a majority or did he highlight the opinion of a segment of our population here?



Using court lingo, "Defense Exhibit A."

He misrepresented the majority because he's still yet to acknowledge that there was a more prevailing opinion against taking Elliott at 4. I think he honestly believes what he said was the majority opinion against taking Elliott.

And frankly your defense exhibit isn't exactly wrong. The running game was important but the entire thing revolves around Romo. Take Romo out in 2014 and guess what? It looks a lot like the 2015 team. That's not to say being able to run the ball isn't important. But it's Romo that is the glue that binds all this stuff together.

 

[tyke1doe]

Disastrous isn't the word I'd use but I'm confused. I like the Elliott pick and see why they went that direction. If they could have moved back and gotten him then that was Jerry's bad. I also posted a quote the other day during the draft where we were trying to move to get one of the QBs and then someone else and Cleveland stuck it to us. Which makes me think Jerry is way too transparent in his plans. Think this happened with Paxton too considering Jerry was crestfallen afterward....according to King. My main issue isn't liking some of these guys we took but that it contradicts all we heard pre-draft. Elliott is "win now." Jaylon Smith is not "now." Dak Prescott is a project. A basketball player is a project. They could all be studs but they aren't win now. Throwing picks around to move up is not win now. I think our best situation post Elliott was to use our position and load the D...tackles and ends and at least have depth. But again, that's just me.

This is what I've been saying. We say we're Romo-friendly, implying that our strategy is to build a team that will win a Super Bowl with Romo, then we act like a building-for-the-future team, taking picks that are going to pay off later yet Romo's later is shorter.

Which are we?

We seem bi-polar, schizophrenic with our strategy.

 

[Redball Express]

I think the zero fumbles could big for us. It seemed like Murray coughed the ball up in almost every game with play-off implications. One things for sure the pick really puts the pressure on the offense to be our dominant unit.

Nothing changes, bro.

Offense has been our signature since Romo arrived.

At least now we have a player who can get it done for years to come.

DMAC and Morris were temp plugs.

Happy Day.

 

[tyke1doe]

Listen, I am not trying to call people out. Or say I know better. I am wrong more than i am right about this team.

But sometimes, just sometimes, I think we all get into a position of over thinking it.

And that is what happened here for some.

I apologize if it looks like I was making fun or ridiculing your position of pre-draft. It's just all the tea leaves said this was a no brainer.

I understood what you were saying because you offered a self-deprecating comment to cover yourself. I understood the essence of what you were saying.

 

[Bleu Star]

If you guys knew it all along, you should at least try to represent the argument you knew was so wrong accurately. Instead of misunderstanding it yet again like our friend TwoDeep does, again, here.

Run the ball with one back. One bell cow. It's not rocket science and some of us never subscribed to making it such with that ridiculous RBBC strategy.

 

[Idgit]

Run the ball with one back. One bell cow. It's not rocket science and some of us never subscribed to making it such with that ridiculous RBBC strategy.

Well, at least we can agree that that perspective is, indeed, not rocket science.

 

[Sydla]

Run the ball with one back. One bell cow. It's not rocket science and some of us never subscribed to making it such with that ridiculous RBBC strategy.

And yet, you are starting to see some of the pro-Elliott crowd talking about preserving him, giving him less carries to keep him fresh for 5 years. A few suggested he get 50-60% of the carries in the regular season.

So apparently our bellcow 4th pick can't be used like a bellcow because he can't get a ton of carries because the position of TB takes a beating and we don't want to run him into the ground.

 

[Crown Royal]

The running game played a huge role, because for the first time, it allowed Romo to operate against defenses that were playing honest. But it wasn't Murray, it was the OL and a healthy Romo and Dez that were the key. The article quotes the team as saying what very few would argue with, that Elliott will be a significant upgrade over Murray.

Think about it. A significant upgrade over a RB who had well over 1,800 yards.

I always remember the second game against Philadelphia that year. The Philly defense basically came into the game and said under no circumstance will Murray run all over them, and they'll commit everyone at the line of scrimmage.

Romo looked at it and said lol k, and just threw everywhere on them.

 

[CyberB0b]

TThe article quotes the team as saying what very few would argue with, that Elliott will be a significant upgrade over Murray.

Think about it. A significant upgrade over a RB who had well over 1,800 yards.

I think that is asinine. Murray had 1800 yards and broke a lot of franchise records. A franchise that happened to have the all time leading rusher in the history of the NFL. To expect a rookie to come in and eclipse that is foolish.

 

[Chuck 54]

I know right now on paper everything looks like it worked out for us in this draft....Looks like the D-line got fixed...Got an impact RB...If Jaylon Smith works out...get a big time steal in the 2nd. But in the back of my mind...I still have this sick feeling 4 years from now....we will look back and Paxton Lynch is torching the league while we are still searching for a QB to replace Romo. And we will all be wondering why we didn't spend a 3rd round pick to move up in the draft to get a franchise QB?

That's always the case; and if Lynch is a bust, we'll be thanking our stars that we didn't waste those draft picks on him when our defense was in shambles.
And that's how I truly felt about Goff and Wentz---those two guys could go bust or be just journeymen as easily as anyone. They are both fighting uphil, in my opinion. I'm so glad we are building a strong supporting team. A rookie or inexperienced QB, even a very highly touted one, can go down the toilet fast if the team is awful, but he can also become great with a good O-line and running game and a defense that doesn't crumble under his every mistake.

I prefer building a strong team and then paying a huge price for a top of round 1 franchise QB if necessary. Giving up lots of premium picks for a QB doesn't set you back so many years when you already have a strong team.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

But Cromartie was taken 19th overall in the 1st round. You can take a player with questions marks like that, picking at 19. But picking so high at 4, I would want more of a sure thing, less question marks, etc.

Zeke has question marks because of his position. It's a high injury rate/terrible deprecation position. The 'knock' against Ramsey is the INT's, but it's hard to get INT's if they are not throwing your way. So I find that 'question mark' to be unreasonable. And as Cromartie showed, not having INT's in college means very little in terms of getting INT's in the pros.





YR

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I think not getting Cook will be a mistake. I am not big on Prescott. He doesn't even seem like a Garrett QB. I almost think that if Prescott has to play...you will see the return of the game plan that calls for us to run, run, incompletion...punt...that we saw with Weeden...over and over and over.....

Getting Connor may or may not be a mistake....However not getting Connor is NOT a mistake in my mind. I don't care for him so I don't mind not wasting the pick at the top of the fourth on him.

 

[Sydla]

I was thanking our lucky stars Cook was taken by Oakland.

They both kinda stink but I'd rather have Prescott over Cook.

 

[speedkilz88]

Zeke has question marks because of his position. It's a high injury rate/terrible deprecation position. The 'knock' against Ramsey is the INT's, but it's hard to get INT's if they are not throwing your way. So I find that 'question mark' to be unreasonable. And as Cromartie showed, not having INT's in college means very little in terms of getting INT's in the pros.





YR

The question mark for Ramsey is if he can play CB.

 

[tyke1doe]

He misrepresented the majority because he's still yet to acknowledge that there was a more prevailing opinion against taking Elliott at 4. I think he honestly believes what he said was the majority opinion against taking Elliott.

Did you read his post with an open mind, or did you read it interpreting it through your own bias? This is what TwoDeep3 said:

I should never be surprised by the opinions on this board. Although there are some opinions that outright shock me. Hell, some of them are mine.

He didn't say ALL. He didn't even say MAJORITY. There were many people on this board who made arguments that the passing game is what fueled this team's attack in 2014. In fact, one prominent poster here makes that argument.

And frankly your defense exhibit isn't exactly wrong. The running game was important but the entire thing revolves around Romo. Take Romo out in 2014 and guess what? It looks a lot like the 2015 team. That's not to say being able to run the ball isn't important. But it's Romo that is the glue that binds all this stuff together.

Romo wasn't able to do anything until we committed to the running game. We had a Romo-friendly offense prior to our commitment to the run in 2014, and we fell flat, even though we had a better defense, particularly in 2007.

Even though we made the playoffs with our Romo-friendly offense, we end up getting blown out. Either that or 8-8 and not making the playoffs.

In 2014, even with our awful defense, we had a legitimate chance of beating the Packers.

So, yes, we need Romo. But Romo needs a running game. And that's the point many of us were making. I'm sorry you interpret this as misrepresenting your position. But people have actually made the very point TwoDeep3 brought up. And I gave you my exhibit because it was spot on.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

The question mark for Ramsey is if he can play CB.

No scout or personnel guy has that question.





YR

 

[speedkilz88]

No scout or personnel guy has that question.





YR

what? do you live in your own little world? Many scouts say he's a safety. Deion Sanders even says he's a safety.

 

[erod]

I'm of the opinion that none of the quarterbacks drafted this year will amount to spit.

And I laugh at all the "experts" who suggest that Houston is a major contender now that they've drafted additional weapons for their new quarterback, Osweiler. This is the same QB that Denver had and said, "Meh, no thanks. Good luck somewhere else. We'll take a flyer on somebody we barely know."

Hopefully, the Broncos saved Jerry from himself with Lynch. When I heard about how relatively immature and stupid he is for a quarterback, that soured me on him. I'd rather gamble on Jaylen Smith's knee recovering than Lynch's brain doing things it's never done before.

 

[Plankton]

Antonio Cromartie played 4 years at FSU and had 5 INT's. In his 2nd season with the Chargers, he had 10 INT's. And making picks has never been a problem with his game.



YR

But Cromartie was taken 19th overall in the 1st round. You can take a player with questions marks like that, picking at 19. But picking so high at 4, I would want more of a sure thing, less question marks, etc.

Cromartie played two years at Florida State. He was injured his junior year, then went pro. He had 2 INTs in two seasons.