Quarterback or Impact

[waving monkey]

He broke his collarbone essentially once this year and it was horribly mismanaged by the team leading to the second break. This was the first season since 2010 he missed more than one game. That's not exactly an argument for being fragile. People are grossly overreacting. It is far from panic time with Romo. I am not saying don't take a QB if he is your BPA, but there is absolutely no need to reach for one.

Im less secure then you about Romo's health. However you seem open to drafting a quality
QB so there is no argument from me.

 

[Bcrav4]

That's the problem, he doesn't have "health problems". That's an overblown reaction to this season. As I said, other than this season he hasn't missed more than one game since 2010. If the team would have handled his collarbone the right way when he broke it seasons ago, and had the plate inserted, or the very least this season, then the second (and possibly the first) injury this season would have never happened. The guy is far from fragile, particularly if does elect to get the plate now which I think he will.

I disagree. How many times has Romo ended the season on IR? If the goal is to win a Super bowl, he wouldn't have been available to lead us there.

 

[JW82]

are we really debating this after the season we went through? really?

amazing isn't it? You would think Tony was 28 with no injury history and we felt great about the backups we have.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Sit and wait three years to find out if your #4 pick is in fact, an impact player or a bust, or take a guy and know almost immediately--while devoting resources to a good backup? A QB at #4 is absolutely unnecessary. If he is BPA, fine, but I just don't see it.

It all comes down to their assessment of Romo's longevity and probability of injury. If they think he has 2 years left and that's it, you have to go QB. If you think he can still play 3 or 4 years, you probably need to go with another position that can help you right away. Additionally, if you think the injuries were a fluke and he will play most of the next 3 or 4 years, then go another position. However, if you think his body is breaking down and at 36 years old, he is going to be getting injured more frequently, then you go QB since he will not be sitting for multiple years.

That is really what this all boils down to...........How much longer can Romo play and can Romo stay healthy during that time frame.

If they select Goff or Lynch at pick 4, I think you have your answer to what they expect.

 

[big dog cowboy]

It all comes down to their assessment of Romo's longevity and probability of injury. If they think he has 2 years left and that's it, you have to go QB. If you think he can still play 3 or 4 years, you probably need to go with another position that can help you right away. Additionally, if you think the injuries were a fluke and he will play most of the next 3 or 4 years, then go another position. That is really what this all boils down to...........How much longer can Romo play and can Romo stay healthy during that time frame.

Jerry said what, 4 more years?

 

[IrishAnto]

Jerry said what, 4 more years?

And when was Nostradamus Jones ever wrong?????

 

[IrishAnto]

I am not trying to be arrogant, but you do realize that just about every veteran player in the league is dealing with injuries that have to be constantly monitored and managed, right? If you think Romo is the only one getting cortisone shots, or the only QB for that matter, you're naive. That is all a part of the game.

You might want to read this:

http://cowboyszone.com/threads/two-...s-qb-call-is-vital.340792/page-2#post-6513537

 

[Manwiththeplan]

I guess my thing is I don't think this draft is full of non QB blue chippers. When you have one of those guys, you should take him over a QB, because history has usually shown that you're better off taking Ndamekong Suh over Sam Bradford, Calvin Johnson over Jamarcus Russell, Julius Peppers of David Carr, even though it did not happen in those cases.

However I don't think there is a comparable prospect in this draft to the three guys I mentioned. Jeremy Tunsil likely will be a good LT and imo, is the likely #1 pick/prospect. But Joey Bosa is not Suh, Peppers, Mario Williams or any other D-linemen that went #1 or #2. People knocked Mario Williams because his play tailed off as a Junior, but he still had 14.5 sacks compared to Bosa's 5.0 as a junior.

Jaylon Smith won't play this season and even Myles Jack, while I think is a safe pick, not 100% sure he's worth picking in the top 5. Jalen Ramsey is definately over rated in my book. I think Vernon Hargreaves III is a better CB prospect, but ofcourse everyone likes Ramsey because he can play safety, however, he ended the year with 0 ints. The previous year he only had 2. Seems like a good prospect, but not worthy of a top 5 pick.

If I did not go QB, I'd likely take A'shawn Robinson, I think he could become a dominant DT, but clearly not a Suh or McCoy.

All in all, I think very little separates the top 5-7 prospects and I do consider both QBs in that top 7, so I'd almost certainly go QB barring one of them stinking it up at the combine/proday and A'shawn Robinson blowing up at his.

 

[DFWJC]

If there's a QB there that they love, by all means don't pass up the opportunity.

But so many writers and analysts seem to keep missing the obvious point that just because you have a top pick doesn't mean there's a QB worthy of it.
Top rated (pre-draft) QBs are not obviously all equal.

D Russell, Akili Smith, Couch, Carr, Gabbert and even RG3 and V Young, etc, etc all scream buyer .

Now if you think the guy available is one of the many top 5 QBs that did pan out--and that list is long--then you shouldn't pass him up.
Maybe they see Goff or Lynch in that light?
If so and they are there, take them!

It's just plain dumb to say just b/c you have a high pick and have a need at a position, then you should take one regardless of how you rate them.

 

[Killerinstinct]

If there's a QB there that they love, by all means don't pass up the opportunity.

But so many writers and analysts seem to keep missing the obvious point that just because you have a top pick doesn't mean there's a QB worthy of it.
Top rated (pre-draft) QBs are not obviously not all equal.

D Russell, Akili Smith, Couch, Carr, Gabbert and even RG3 and V Young, etc, etc all scream buyer .

Now if you think the guy available is one of the many top 5 QBs that did pan out--and that list is long--then you shouldn't pass him up.
Maybe they see Goff or Lynch in that light?
If so and they are there, take them!

It's just plain dumb to say just b/c you have a high pick and have a need at a position, then you should take one regardless of how you rate them.

I agree and if they evaluate the QB's and they like 1 over the other I hope they don't take the other at 4. But I don't think they will.

 

[Doomsday101]

To me getting a FA QB reject and using 4 for a another pick is trying to do as Dallas always does looking for the quick fix. As hard as it is to find quality QB, it does not make me feel warm inside getting a reject QB which in my view is what JF is and what RGIII. I think drafting a QB giving them a year or 2 to develop will pay off long term

 

[tyke1doe]

All of these dilemmas are predicated on how good the player is going to be.
But ... if all things are equal and you could assure the player was going to be good whenever he started, you go with the quarterback and don't look back, especially in our situation.

Romo has about two good years left. Sure, we can get a corner, linebacker or defense end who could make an immediate impact.

But in the long run, corners, linebackers and defensive ends don't take you to multiple Super Bowls. Quarterbacks do, especially the franchise ones - Peyton, Big Ben, Wilson, Brady, Elway, Aikman, Staubach, Bradshaw, Montana, Trankenton, Griese, Starr, etc.

If you feel Lynch or Goff are franchise quarterbacks, you take them, even if they may have to sit on the bench for two years.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

I agree and if they evaluate the QB's and they like 1 over the other I hope they don't take the other at 4.

that really should not factor into the equation unless both QBs are there. even if it's the #2 QB, it only matters where they rate them compared to the remaining players on the board.

If their draft board looks like this

1- Jeremy Tunsil
2- Joey Bosa
3- Jared Goff
4- Vernon Hargreaves III
5- A'Shawn Robinson
6- Paxton Lynch

Then it really doesn't matter that they were the second ranked QB. I think we agree that they should not reach to the 10th or 15th highest rated prospect to take the #2 QB or even #1 QB, but where a prospect ranks among their position should never factor in

 

[Dhragon]

that really should not factor into the equation unless both QBs are there. even if it's the #2 QB, it only matters where they rate them compared to the remaining players on the board.

If their draft board looks like this

1- Jeremy Tunsil
2- Joey Bosa
3- Jared Goff
4- Vernon Hargreaves III
5- A'Shawn Robinson
6- Paxton Lynch

Then it really doesn't matter that they were the second ranked QB. I think we agree that they should not reach to the 10th or 15th highest rated prospect to take the #2 QB or even #1 QB, but where a prospect ranks among their position should never factor in

Don't teams often usually put players in "Tiers" when evaluating them? If "Tier 1" is the best and an available QB is available when we pick then I hope that's what we go with, even if the non-QB is rated #2 overall and the QB is rated #12 overall. Doesn't matter to me what the ranking as long as they are in the best Tier possible, and QB as a position is so much more valuable long-term than any other.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Don't teams often usually put players in "Tiers" when evaluating them? If "Tier 1" is the best and an available QB is available when we pick then I hope that's what we go with, even if the non-QB is rated #2 overall and the QB is rated #12 overall. Doesn't matter to me what the ranking as long as they are in the best Tier possible, and QB as a position is so much more valuable long-term than any other.

When the Cowboys draft board leaked a few years back, I don't think it was broken in tiers, but I do believe the scouts that put the board together are aware of different points where the talent drops. JMO, there is no prospect at the top of the draft who at this point deserves to be separated from the pack. Maybe Tunsil, Bosa and Goff at the top, closely followed by Hargreaves, Robinson, Lynch, Ramsey, Jack. Maybe 1 or 2 others.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Jerry said what, 4 more years?

Yep, he sure did.

The million dollar question is going to be, "was he telling the truth?". Obviously if you want one of the QBs, you don't want to advertise it to the rest of the league and have teams leap frog us at 4 to get the QBs first. So naturally, you are going to want to downplay it as if you are looking mainly at other positions.

What Jerry and Garrett say publicly may not be what they are saying privately behind closed doors at the Ranch. Going to be fun watching what unfolds.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I guess my thing is I don't think this draft is full of non QB blue chippers. When you have one of those guys, you should take him over a QB, because history has usually shown that you're better off taking Ndamekong Suh over Sam Bradford, Calvin Johnson over Jamarcus Russell, Julius Peppers of David Carr, even though it did not happen in those cases.

However I don't think there is a comparable prospect in this draft to the three guys I mentioned. Jeremy Tunsil likely will be a good LT and imo, is the likely #1 pick/prospect. But Joey Bosa is not Suh, Peppers, Mario Williams or any other D-linemen that went #1 or #2. People knocked Mario Williams because his play tailed off as a Junior, but he still had 14.5 sacks compared to Bosa's 5.0 as a junior.

Jaylon Smith won't play this season and even Myles Jack, while I think is a safe pick, not 100% sure he's worth picking in the top 5. Jalen Ramsey is definately over rated in my book. I think Vernon Hargreaves III is a better CB prospect, but ofcourse everyone likes Ramsey because he can play safety, however, he ended the year with 0 ints. The previous year he only had 2. Seems like a good prospect, but not worthy of a top 5 pick.

If I did not go QB, I'd likely take A'shawn Robinson, I think he could become a dominant DT, but clearly not a Suh or McCoy.

All in all, I think very little separates the top 5-7 prospects and I do consider both QBs in that top 7, so I'd almost certainly go QB barring one of them stinking it up at the combine/proday and A'shawn Robinson blowing up at his.

Excellent post....................I think you are right, that if the evaluations hold then we are probably picking either Goff or Lynch at 4.

I really think the plan for next year is Romo, Goff or Lynch, and Moore as your 3 QBs.

 

[Beast_from_East]

All of these dilemmas are predicated on how good the player is going to be.
But ... if all things are equal and you could assure the player was going to be good whenever he started, you go with the quarterback and don't look back, especially in our situation.

Romo has about two good years left. Sure, we can get a corner, linebacker or defense end who could make an immediate impact.

But in the long run, corners, linebackers and defensive ends don't take you to multiple Super Bowls. Quarterbacks do, especially the franchise ones - Peyton, Big Ben, Wilson, Brady, Elway, Aikman, Staubach, Bradshaw, Montana, Trankenton, Griese, Starr, etc.

If you feel Lynch or Goff are franchise quarterbacks, you take them, even if they may have to sit on the bench for two years.

Yea, I think you are 100% correct and I think this is probably what the Boyz will do come draft day.........pick Goff or Lynch at 4

 

[Beast_from_East]

To me getting a FA QB reject and using 4 for a another pick is trying to do as Dallas always does looking for the quick fix. As hard as it is to find quality QB, it does not make me feel warm inside getting a reject QB which in my view is what JF is and what RGIII. I think drafting a QB giving them a year or 2 to develop will pay off long term

I don't like the reject plan either..........people say to go get a QB in free agency instead of using a top 5 pick on one because all he will do is sit the bench. The problem is that they never say who to go get. Anybody that is any good at all is not going to be available, teams do not let good QBs just walk out the door into free agency.

The vet free agents available are going to be the likes of Cassel, Weedon, Manzel, RG3, Kapernick, ect....

This list does not fill me with confidence that things are going to be any different next year if Romo gets hurt again. Now if we have Goff or Lynch as the backup QB, I think things would look very different.

They are probably good enough to get you 1 or 2 wins if you are trying to hold the fort until Romo gets back. That is why Jerry said on the FAN that drafing a QB at 4 was a move "for now" as well as a move "for the future".

 

[Rogerthat12]

I don't like the idea of drafting a backup QB with the 4th pick in the first round...I am for drafting a franchise QB with that pick. The problem is we don't know that either of these guys are going to end as the franchise QB or just another Backup QB. What is scary is holding on to a drafted guy like Lynch for 3-4 years just to find out he isn't a franchise QB after all...then it's back to the drawing board in 3-4 years and then we are set back 2 more waiting for the next one drafted shows what they are made of.

I don't want us reaching for a QB just because they are a QB...that could do more damage long term than not drafting one at all this year.

No need to reach at #4, if you have properly evaluated the QB's and you have the two rated in the top 4, then go get your QB.

This move would be to get a franchise QB but allow him to sit and learn under Romo.

The scouts have already vetted the player and the coaches will see what he can do on a daily basis going forward.

Besides, with Romo, you are one fall to the ground from playing the player that you drafted to be the heir apparent in any given moment.

You are not promised a slam dunk regardless if you draft the QB now or in 3 years but you hope that you are not drafting in the top 5 in the next few years anyway.