Ranking the Roster

[CowboyRoy]

I would not disagree with anyone who said that it was the one of two sides of the football that needed the most work for sure.

And I would be completely on board if the lion's share of draft picks were to be used there.

I just don't want to hear anything about how that has to include the #4 overall pick.

If you think about it, the defense needs almost a complete overhaul. And although the offense is in much better shape, we need to find a new QB and a RB. Two of the more important positions on offense to find quality and youth. People can crow all they want about Romo's window. But in two years this team will be completely screwed if we dont develop a young QB. So which side of the ball is in worse shape? Its debatable.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Thanks for the faux lesson but lion's share come from how the king lion would get its fill and then leave the remainder for his pride. That is the dynamic that english hunters were seeing when they started using the term in the 18-19th century.

Perhaps your generation turned it into 'take everything' but I have always taken it to mean that what's left is at the winner's discretion as opposed to the certainty.

The term, as it has come down and evolved, was coined (as you may or may not know) by humans, thus the phrase was developed as seen through the eyes of humans. The lion will take the kill and won't share. That is the human's take. Now, in your socialistic world, the lion would. of course, share and be equitable to all. but that is not reality.
So the phrase has evolved to mean
1. The entire bounty of the kill
or
2. The best and largest part without the Disneyesque take in which the lion actually shares.

As to your g-g-g-generation, why don't you all just fade away. Talking 'bout my g-g-g-generation.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The term, as it has come down and evolved, was coined (as you may or may not know) by humans, thus the phrase was developed as seen through the eyes of humans. The lion will take the kill and won't share. That is the human's take. Now, in your socialistic world, the lion would. of course, share and be equitable to all. but that is not reality.
So the phrase has evolved to mean
1. The entire bounty of the kill
or
2. The best and largest part without the Disneyesque take in which the lion actually shares.

As to your g-g-g-generation, why don't you all just fade away. Talking 'bout my g-g-g-generation.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lion's share

the largest part of something

There is websters and then there is your mccarthyism.

 

[percyhoward]

But...........Murray still got the dirty yards in the 2nd half of the year and he was still great in goal line situations.

This was a two-parter. The other part is that the only real difference in the "dirty yards" department was at the goal line. Here are the conversion rates for 3rd or 4th down, 1-2 yards to go, from anywhere on the field:

2014 Murray 19 of 26 (73.1%)
2015 McFadden 13 of 17 (76.5%)

Add in runs from the 1- or 2-yard line on 1st or 2nd down (which are also short-yardage plays), and it looks like this:

2014 Murray 25 of 32 (78.1%)
2015 McFadden 15 of 21 (71.4%)

In 2014, we had a QB and a #1 WR who were able to exploit defenses near the goal line when those defenses cheated toward the run. We did not have this goal-line passing threat in 2015, and when defenses figured that out, it had a huge effect on how often and how well we ran near the goal line.

from 5-yard line or closer
% of runs resulting in TD
2014 (all 16 games) 9 of 17 (53%)
2015 (games 1-6) 5 of 7 (72%)
2015 (games 7-16) 0 of 3 (0%)

 

[Section446]

Above average roster.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lion's share



There is websters and then there is your mccarthyism.

One source, bloke? And is Webster's really plural? LOL
Oh, my.
The fact that you looked it up and offered a link suggests that you have far too much time on your crusty little hands. I suggest you go back to your tele.

Oh, now I am doing what you did:

"The lion's share, as conceived by Aesop, is all or almost all, not merely a majority or the larger part."
--"The Careful Writer"/Theodore M. Bernstein

You so amuse me. heh

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

One source, bloke? And is Webster's really plural? LOL
Oh, my.
The fact that you looked it up and offered a link suggests that you have far too much time on your crusty little hands. I suggest you go back to your tele.

Oh, now I am doing what you did:

"The lion's share, as conceived by Aesop, is all or almost all, not merely a majority or the larger part."
--"The Careful Writer"/Theodore M. Bernstein

You so amuse me. heh

Well you lose sight of your point arguing semantics. You tried to blame it on millennials remember? Go yell at a cloud.

The different interpretations have been around centuries and are all valid on an internet forum. That is the ultimate conclusion.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Well you lose sight of your point arguing semantics. You tried to blame it on millennials remember? Go yell at a cloud.

The different interpretations have been around centuries and are all valid on an internet forum. That is the ultimate conclusion.

Have you not had your fill of humiliation today, mate?
Do I need to rewrite your response into coherent English and then, again, dismantle your childish thesis? Have you, at last, no shame????

You are a funny, funny bloke. LOL

You amuse me so, but at some point you become bothersome and obsessive. Go back to your tele and watch some showtime. That should fill your crusty little hands with something to do. heh.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Have you not had your fill of humiliation today, mate?
Do I need to rewrite your response into coherent English and then, again, dismantle your childish thesis? Have you, at last, no shame????

You are a funny, funny bloke. LOL

You amuse me so, but at some point you become bothersome and obsessive. Go back to your tele and watch some showtime. That should fill your crusty little hands with something to do. heh.

100% ad hominem. Good job.

If you want to paint yourself as the old man while trying to discredit me by maturity smack then go ahead. I don't think it comes across as you want. Your taunts are meaningless to me.

Lion's share can be interpreted either way. If you want to use your king of the jungle social darwinist interpretation that doesn't actually match animal behavior then go right ahead. The other interpretation is still completely valid.

Bring some more megalomania though please.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

100% ad hominem. Good job.

If you want to paint yourself as the old man while trying to discredit me by maturity smack then go ahead. I don't think it comes across as you want. Your taunts are meaningless to me.

Lion's share can be interpreted either way. If you want to use your king of the jungle social darwinist interpretation that doesn't actually match animal behavior then go right ahead. The other interpretation is still completely valid.

Bring some more megalomania though please.

I believe that I might have touched a nerve. Several.
Oh, my, such insecurity. So much invective. So many uninvited observations.
You, my dear fellow, have lion's share of insecurity.
And you appear to be obsessive. I choose to not play that game. Please, go off into the ether space and crowd some other poor fellow's inbox with your self-pity and leave me to concentrate on football, a man's sport, for which you may not be fit. Also, tea and scones will chase away the self-pity. Or you can have a pity party all by yourself, bloke.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I believe that I might have touched a nerve. Several.
Oh, my, such insecurity. So much invective. So many uninvited observations.
You, my dear fellow, have lion's share of insecurity.
And you appear to be obsessive. I choose to not play that game. Please, go off into the ether space and crowd some other poor fellow's inbox with your self-pity and leave me to concentrate on football, a man's sport, for which you may not be fit. Also, tea and scones will chase away the self-pity. Or you can have a pity party all by yourself, bloke.

Thanks for the megalomania. You sure told me.

I'm trying to talk about the subject at hand. We were discussing the meaning of 'lion's share.' Now it's devolved into you making aspersions as to my emotional disposition while I try to steer it back to the subject. You've completely abandoned the point and instead try to make it all about me.

The obsession line is especially ironic in that context.

 

[andersbears]

dez bryant and jason witten are my favorite boys player

happy to watch this year )))))

 

[Echo9]

If Escobar is truly not going to play next year, then I would think that the Cowboys could easily give him low tender and keep him around. NO one is going to give up a 3rd rounder to sign him if he has done nothing in the NFL and is coming off an injured season. Now if you just want to see him gone, so be it. But I have to wonder that part of the reason the kid hasnt played much is because they simply dont play him. How is he going to get much playing time with Witten in there? Can we really no if he has been a bust or not. I can see him going to another team and being a pass catching nightmare. A la the Patriots.

Is there such a thing as a 3rd round tender? I don't think there is. I don't WANT to see him gone, I'm just listening to what people connected to the Cowboys have said and thats that he has not done enough to impress the coaches. He won't get a ton of money, but I doubt Dallas will be putting a 2nd round tender on him (which I think might be the minimum since he was drafted in the 2nd). I never said he was a bust, and he could very well be an average TE in the league. I just don't see us keeping him very long, and he also will NOT play in 2016, which means we are not deep at the position.

 

[jnday]

Based on?

He has done exactly what the coaching staff wants him to do. Any elevated evpectations on your part doesn't equate to him being a disappointment.

I find it hard to blame the player when the coaches don't take advantage of his talents .

 

[jnday]

You've got a Pro Bowl, Hall of Fame player in Witten who may very well be hitting the downside of his career.

You have Hanna, a solid, Jack-of-all-trades player who isn't used much at all outside of blocking.

You have Escobar, a virtual non-factor this far who is likely to not even be available for a considerable part of the season, if at all.

And then you have Swaim. A player the team had to have - at the expense of RB Thomas Rawls - who showed nothing for his rookie year and is still a complete unknown.

If that looks great to you, I don't know what to tell you.

I'm not interested in making any sort of a significant draft investment, but their current lineup offers more questions than answers.

If you're trying to shine it up, you're not making a strong case at all.

Good post. Some may disagree, but I think Witten actually hurts the offense in some ways at this point in his career . He should lead the league in running routes that are a yard short of the first down. He gets little yardage after the catch, so he should adjust to get a extra yard or two, but he hasn't. His nasty little habit of jumping offsides seems to be more occurring more frequently too.

 

[Typhus]

Good post. Some may disagree, but I think Witten actually hurts the offense in some ways at this point in his career . He should lead the league in running routes that are a yard short of the first down. He gets little yardage after the catch, so he should adjust to get a extra yard or two, but he hasn't. His nasty little habit of jumping offsides seems to be more occurring more frequently too.

I just find it a little perplexing that this thread has turned into a focus on upgrading the TE position.
There are other positions that are in far more need of attention.
If my OP was slightly off in the positional need clarification, than thats my error,, by original point of this entire thread however, was to look closely at this roster, what we have done do address holes in FA, and how we approach the draft with our current slotting and draft picks.
As Ive stated and tried to explain several times,, I will not feel slighted in the least if we complete this draft with selecting a single TE.

 

[big dog cowboy]

And then you have Swaim. A player the team had to have - at the expense of RB Thomas Rawls - who showed nothing for his rookie year and is still a complete unknown.

We don't know that the Cowboys would have selected Rawls with the Swaim pick.

Swaim might be a unknown to the fans but he isn't to the team. Exactly what did you expect to see from him last year?

 

[CCBoy]

Thanks for the megalomania. You sure told me.

I'm trying to talk about the subject at hand. We were discussing the meaning of 'lion's share.' Now it's devolved into you making aspersions as to my emotional disposition while I try to steer it back to the subject. You've completely abandoned the point and instead try to make it all about me.

The obsession line is especially ironic in that context.

 

[CCBoy]

I just find it a little perplexing that this thread has turned into a focus on upgrading the TE position.
There are other positions that are in far more need of attention.
If my OP was slightly off in the positional need clarification, than thats my error,, by original point of this entire thread however, was to look closely at this roster, what we have done do address holes in FA, and how we approach the draft with our current slotting and draft picks.
As Ive stated and tried to explain several times,, I will not feel slighted in the least if we complete this draft with selecting a single TE.

I agree with you Golden. The team needs anchor types of growth at Defensive End, Defensive Tackle, Cornerback, Safety, and new direction for running back and wide receiver.

As to QB, I just have to rely upon the adage, that the best laid plans of men and mice often go asunder...

 

[thisiscowboyscountry]

Desperately needed:
DE
DT
CB
Back up QB

Would be nice:
WR
RB
S
OLB

I dont think were desperate at dt or cb at all. I see de, olb, safety, and backup qb as the biggest needs. Two of the 4 get addressed early in the draft