News: PFT: Report: Cowboys getting calls about Darren McFadden

Derinyar said:
The reason you don't keep McFadden is team building and cap based. Your RB4 should be inactive or playing on special teams. McFadden is RB4 on this team, as the three active right now are Zeke, Morris, and Dunbar. You might keep RB4 active if he has a job on special teams. So your inactive RB4 is 29 years old and has an over 2 million dollar cap hit. That's the reason you try to trade him for something. If you get to the point where he's taking the majority of snaps things have gone seriously wrong.

To me the reason you keep Jackson over McFadden isn't that Jackson is better then McFadden right now, he probably isn't. You keep Jackson over McFadden because he is younger, cheaper and with upside. Hell if you feel you need 4 RB active on gameday Jackson can play special teams for you so he's not just sitting on the sidelines collecting his 2.5 million dollar pay check.

Now it looks like the Cowboys are perfectly happy to keep him on NFI. I'm fine with that, but basically it kicks the can on this question down the road 6-8 weeks and kills any potential trade value McFadden might have.
Click to expand...
^^^^this x 1000
 
Derinyar said:
The reason you don't keep McFadden is team building and cap based. Your RB4 should be inactive or playing on special teams. McFadden is RB4 on this team, as the three active right now are Zeke, Morris, and Dunbar. You might keep RB4 active if he has a job on special teams. So your inactive RB4 is 29 years old and has an over 2 million dollar cap hit. That's the reason you try to trade him for something. If you get to the point where he's taking the majority of snaps things have gone seriously wrong.

To me the reason you keep Jackson over McFadden isn't that Jackson is better then McFadden right now, he probably isn't. You keep Jackson over McFadden because he is younger, cheaper and with upside. Hell if you feel you need 4 RB active on gameday Jackson can play special teams for you so he's not just sitting on the sidelines collecting his 2.5 million dollar pay check.

Now it looks like the Cowboys are perfectly happy to keep him on NFI. I'm fine with that, but basically it kicks the can on this question down the road 6-8 weeks and kills any potential trade value McFadden might have.
Click to expand...
Good post.

I like McFadden. If they didn't draft Zeke, then I think Morris and McFadden would have been a good combo for #1 and #2. Morris the grinder and short yardage guy and McFadden the big play guy that is a good receiver and blocker; however, as you said, the #3 needs to play ST. I don't see any chance that 4 RBs would be active on game day; although, I guess they could consider Dunbar more of a WR.

If they can keep him on NFI (He has to still be injured to legitimately do it), then that's a decent option. I'm fairly certain that his salary does not become guaranteed if he is on the NFI like it would be if he was on the 53; although, they do have to pay him 1/17th of his salary each week he is on the NFI (706K for 6 weeks). Once the 6 weeks is up, the Cowboys can re-access their situation at RB. If McFadden is not needed, then some team will likely be hurting for a RB due to injuries and he could have more trade value.
 
I would take a 5th or a vet end or safety for him. I wouldn't hate a early 6th for him from a trash team like the Browns or 49ers.
 
xwalker said:
Good post.

I like McFadden. If they didn't draft Zeke, then I think Morris and McFadden would have been a good combo for #1 and #2. Morris the grinder and short yardage guy and McFadden the big play guy that is a good receiver and blocker; however, as you said, the #3 needs to play ST. I don't see any chance that 4 RBs would be active on game day; although, I guess they could consider Dunbar more of a WR.

If they can keep him on NFI (He has to still be injured to legitimately do it), then that's a decent option. I'm fairly certain that his salary does not become guaranteed if he is on the NFI like it would be if he was on the 53; although, they do have to pay him 1/17th of his salary each week he is on the NFI (706K for 6 weeks). Once the 6 weeks is up, the Cowboys can re-access their situation at RB. If McFadden is not needed, then some team will likely be hurting for a RB due to injuries and he could have more trade value.
Click to expand...
Actually I thought you didn't have to pay a player when they are on NFI. They will pay him because its terrible form not to, but I don't think they're required by CBA to do so.
 
CalPolyTechnique said:
Go fetch it for me.
Click to expand...
Well since you aren't my mom, dad, grand parent, boss or anyone of importance I'm good.

You want stats go find them yourself like everybody else does our don't talk about a situation since you aren't informed enough to make a valid statement.
 
Derinyar said:
The reason you don't keep McFadden is team building and cap based. Your RB4 should be inactive or playing on special teams. McFadden is RB4 on this team, as the three active right now are Zeke, Morris, and Dunbar. You might keep RB4 active if he has a job on special teams. So your inactive RB4 is 29 years old and has an over 2 million dollar cap hit. That's the reason you try to trade him for something. If you get to the point where he's taking the majority of snaps things have gone seriously wrong.

To me the reason you keep Jackson over McFadden isn't that Jackson is better then McFadden right now, he probably isn't. You keep Jackson over McFadden because he is younger, cheaper and with upside. Hell if you feel you need 4 RB active on gameday Jackson can play special teams for you so he's not just sitting on the sidelines collecting his 2.5 million dollar pay check.

Now it looks like the Cowboys are perfectly happy to keep him on NFI. I'm fine with that, but basically it kicks the can on this question down the road 6-8 weeks and kills any potential trade value McFadden might have.
Click to expand...

Great post!

If he is in demand, though, I'd activate him and trade him now. No point keeping him on NFI and have him tripping over his dog breaking a leg.
 
Derinyar said:
The reason you don't keep McFadden is team building and cap based. Your RB4 should be inactive or playing on special teams. McFadden is RB4 on this team, as the three active right now are Zeke, Morris, and Dunbar. You might keep RB4 active if he has a job on special teams. So your inactive RB4 is 29 years old and has an over 2 million dollar cap hit. That's the reason you try to trade him for something. If you get to the point where he's taking the majority of snaps things have gone seriously wrong.

To me the reason you keep Jackson over McFadden isn't that Jackson is better then McFadden right now, he probably isn't. You keep Jackson over McFadden because he is younger, cheaper and with upside. Hell if you feel you need 4 RB active on gameday Jackson can play special teams for you so he's not just sitting on the sidelines collecting his 2.5 million dollar pay check.

Now it looks like the Cowboys are perfectly happy to keep him on NFI. I'm fine with that, but basically it kicks the can on this question down the road 6-8 weeks and kills any potential trade value McFadden might have.
Click to expand...

I largely agree, they should get what they can for McFadden and help this rebuild move along,,, but if either Alfred or Zeke gets hurt McFadden would then become the #2 because Dunbar isn't a true running back. Having said that, Jackson can handle that duty too, just maybe not as well regarding blitz pickup. IMO you keep the long-term player, which is Jackson, otherwise you've wasted a draft pick
 
EGG said:
I largely agree, they should get what they can for McFadden and help this rebuild move along,,, but if either Alfred or Zeke gets hurt McFadden would then become the #2 because Dunbar isn't a true running back. Having said that, Jackson can handle that duty too, just maybe not as well regarding blitz pickup. IMO you keep the long-term player, which is Jackson, otherwise you've wasted a draft pick
Click to expand...
I wish people would stop with Jackson can't pass block and McFadden is so good at it. Jackson has improved tremendously in the pass blocking I the point I would trust him with Romo. He isn't on Zeke level but pretty decent.

Mcfadden is the reason Romo got hurt again in the Panthers game last year cause he couldn't block Thomas Davis
 
Irvin88_4life said:
I wish people would stop with Jackson can't pass block and McFadden is so good at it. Jackson has improved tremendously in the pass blocking I the point I would trust him with Romo. He isn't on Zeke level but pretty decent.

Mcfadden is the reason Romo got hurt again in the Panthers game last year cause he couldn't block Thomas Davis
Click to expand...

Just saying that vet RBs are better than rookies at reading defenses and picking up the right defender. Is it enough to keep McFadden over Jackson? Again, I don't think so.
 
Derinyar said:
The reason you don't keep McFadden is team building and cap based. Your RB4 should be inactive or playing on special teams. McFadden is RB4 on this team, as the three active right now are Zeke, Morris, and Dunbar. You might keep RB4 active if he has a job on special teams. So your inactive RB4 is 29 years old and has an over 2 million dollar cap hit. That's the reason you try to trade him for something. If you get to the point where he's taking the majority of snaps things have gone seriously wrong.

To me the reason you keep Jackson over McFadden isn't that Jackson is better then McFadden right now, he probably isn't. You keep Jackson over McFadden because he is younger, cheaper and with upside. Hell if you feel you need 4 RB active on gameday Jackson can play special teams for you so he's not just sitting on the sidelines collecting his 2.5 million dollar pay check.

Now it looks like the Cowboys are perfectly happy to keep him on NFI. I'm fine with that, but basically it kicks the can on this question down the road 6-8 weeks and kills any potential trade value McFadden might have.
Click to expand...

Given the position, I think a few weeks might increase McFadden's trade value. Anyone sure of the NFI rules? Can they activate him whenever they want, or us there a waiting period like PUP?
 
Don't know why anyone would want to trade for McFadden, if you put them behind a lesser OL than he has with the Cowboys he'll be back to averaging 3.5 a carry.
 
stasheroo said:
Given the position, I think a few weeks might increase McFadden's trade value. Anyone sure of the NFI rules? Can they activate him whenever they want, or us there a waiting period like PUP?
Click to expand...

Problem is he's missed all of training camp and preseason he hasn't done anything since mid June. He's likely to end up with some soft tissue injury like a hamstring when he returns.
 
EGG said:
Just saying that vet RBs are better than rookies at reading defenses and picking up the right defender. Is it enough to keep McFadden over Jackson? Again, I don't think so.
Click to expand...
There are vets that can't pickup blitzes at all. Zeke is a rookie and one of his best traits is picking up the blitz.

Personally pass blocking isn't the reason I want Jackson over McFadden or the deciding factor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 13,148 (members: 30, guests: 13,118)
Robots: 1,811

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
474,563
Messages
14,545,788
Members
24,212
Latest member
JerryJonesSupporter
Back
Top