Tampa has released Gerald McCoy

[Sydla]

And be forced to let some go to pay this guy that "$22-$24 million". They have a lot of cap room next year, and also have few guys under contract. And the fact is that whether you think they made a mistake or not, they just used their top draft asset on their under tackle. It's counter-productive to now sit that guy while you guarantee two years minimum to a guy at that same position.



You want to tell yourself that to be mad about it. I can't stop you there.

There are dead weight contracts coming off the books anyway. You keep making it sound like we would have to cut a bunch of key, important players to keep him and that's really not the case at all.

They absolutely, positively could have McCoy on this roster for essentially two years and still have the cap space to do what they want to do. They wouldn't need to start cutting really good players to fit McCoy into the mix.

Money isn't the issue here. Their overinflated opinion of their depth chart is most likely the problem.

 

[Hennessy_King]

There are dead weight contracts coming off the books anyway. You keep making it sound like we would have to cut a bunch of key, important players to keep him and that's really not the case at all.

They absolutely, positively could have McCoy on this roster for essentially two years and still have the cap space to do what they want to do. They wouldn't need to start cutting really good players to fit McCoy into the mix.

Money isn't the issue here. Their overinflated opinion of their depth chart is most likely the problem.

facts, and with garrett's brother as head of pro scouting it makes sense.

 

[Stash]

You know they do it "through the draft" we don't sign starters in free agency

That's actually a good thing.

 

[G2]

Exactly.

He very well might get a big contract. But there's no reason to not bring him in and maybe even sell him on playing here, for a team that might be able to win something, for a bit less.

I have little doubt that the reason they aren't in on this is because they believe with the addition of Hill in the draft, Marinelli has all he needs.

I've been whining about the DL, specifically the DT's for years. It's time the staff puts some quality depth there. I'm certain the L.A. Rams game may have turned out a little different.

 

[Stash]

There are dead weight contracts coming off the books anyway. You keep making it sound like we would have to cut a bunch of key, important players to keep him and that's really not the case at all.

They absolutely, positively could have McCoy on this roster for essentially two years and still have the cap space to do what they want to do. They wouldn't need to start cutting really good players to fit McCoy into the mix.

Money isn't the issue here. Their overinflated opinion of their depth chart is most likely the problem.

That's what you want to keep telling yourself, while the "acceptable cost" for Gerald McCoy goes up, and up, and up, and up...

It started at one year and $10 million and now we're up to 2 years and $22-$24 million", I'd love to see you at a negotiating table.

 

[Sydla]

facts, and with garrett's brother as head of pro scouting it makes sense.

They draft Hill. Marinelli loves him. 3T is solved. That's their thinking.

If McCoy was out there and only getting $6MM a year offers, the Cowboys still wouldn't be involved. It's just not their thing. And a clear mistake in how they roster build.

 

[Stash]

I've been whining about the DL, specifically the DT's for years. It's time the staff puts some quality depth there. I'm certain the L.A. Rams game may have turned out a little different.

That loss was on the coaching. And the fact that the Rams knew every move we were making. Even vastly superior talent would not have overcome that disadvantage.

 

[G2]

He's got a market, he won't sign on for that.

Maybe. He's a 9 season vet. I don't think he'll break the bank. And he won't be required to play 70% of the defensive snaps like in Tampa. JMO

 

[Stash]

They draft Hill. Marinelli loves him. 3T is solved. That's their thinking.

If McCoy was out there and only getting $6MM a year offers, the Cowboys still wouldn't be involved. It's just not their thing. And a clear mistake in how they roster build.

That's a terrific fantasy hypothetical to bash them for. Requires no support whatsoever.

 

[Sydla]

That's what you want to keep telling yourself, while the "acceptable cost" for Gerald McCoy goes up, and up, and up, and up...

It started at one year and $10 million and now we're up to 2 years and $22-$24 million", I'd love to see you at a negotiating table.

Ideally, I'd love him on a one year deal like Suh has played under the last 2 years. But if he's getting multi-year deals, I would be content with a 3 year deal that basically is a two year deal for around $22-24MM. I think he's that good and frankly, he's be one of the best, if not the best, DT on this team over that two year period.

This might be a different debate if I knew Trysten Hill was gonna be a stud.

 

[Stash]

Maybe. He's a 9 season vet. I don't think he'll break the bank. And he won't be required to play 70% of the defensive snaps like in Tampa. JMO

If he signs a one year deal for $10 million or less, I'll pick up my torch and pitchfork and join the rest of you. Until then? This is an exercise in unnecessary angst and futility.

 

[G2]

That loss was on the coaching. And the fact that the Rams knew every move we were making. Even vastly superior talent would not have overcome that disadvantage.

The front 7 got man handled. There was a lack of execution at the point of attack. I mean, yeah, some blame goes on the coaching, but we had no answers to the 275 yards rushing that got put down. Goff had a par game at best. We've lacked man power at the DTs forever. Seattle, we barely squeaked by and the defense looked gassed vs. LA.

 

[Hennessy_King]

That's a terrific fantasy hypothetical to bash them for. Requires no support whatsoever.

It's absolutely true. They don't pay starters in free agency. You build a roster using the draft and free agency. They totally neglect the FA side.

 

[Stash]

Ideally, I'd love him on a one year deal like Suh has played under the last 2 years. But if he's getting multi-year deals, I would be content with a 3 year deal that basically is a two year deal for around $22-24MM. I think he's that good and frankly, he's be one of the best, if not the best, DT on this team over that two year period.

I don;t disagree that he would be one of, if not the best DT on this roster. But the fact is that there are other mouths to feed and you can't afford two years at $24 million.

This might be a different debate if I knew Trysten Hill was gonna be a stud.

You'll never find out with a $24 million player in front of him at his position for two years.

 

[Sydla]

That's a terrific fantasy hypothetical to bash them for. Requires no support whatsoever.

It's really not a hypothetical at all. Their recent history of FA shows they really don't go after starting caliber type players. They use FA for depth purposes. The closest thing they have signed for starting caliber would be a slot WR in Hurns and Cobb. They have traded for guys like Cooper and Quinn but those moves were largely out of desperation - the WRs sucked before Cooper and Gregory being a question mark for 2019 made Quinn essential.

They don't view McCoy as that type of need because they feel they have no issues at DT with Woods, Crawford, Hill, Collins, Ross, Covington, etc.

When was the last time they went out and signed a player for a decent chunk of change that was a starting caliber player who was pretty good like McCoy?

 

[G2]

Ideally, I'd love him on a one year deal like Suh has played under the last 2 years. But if he's getting multi-year deals, I would be content with a 3 year deal that basically is a two year deal for around $22-24MM. I think he's that good and frankly, he's be one of the best, if not the best, DT on this team over that two year period.

This might be a different debate if I knew Trysten Hill was gonna be a stud.

We have no idea about Hill. But I'm not very confident that Collins, Woods or Ross are going to wow the middle any time soon. And I don't really feel confident Crawford can either. But they have him listed at DE.

 

[Stash]

Here's your answer:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...ve-plays-to-rams-with-obvious-tips-and-tells/

Nobody is winning a chess game where your opponent knows what you're going to do "90% of the time".

 

[G2]

[QUOTE="stasheroo, post: 9223965, member: 5952"

You'll never find out with a $24 million player in front of him at his position for two years.[/QUOTE]
The best player would start regardless at DT, but they rotate, so it's really not worth arguing.

 

[Sydla]

You'll never find out with a $24 million player in front of him at his position for two years.

LOL.

Is this a form of the "progress stopper" argument? Please, god, stash tell me you aren't making that argument.

 

[Stash]

It's really not a hypothetical at all. Their recent history of FA shows they really don't go after starting caliber type players.
They use FA for depth purposes. The closest thing they have signed for starting caliber would be a slot WR in Hurns and Cobb. They have traded for guys like Cooper and Quinn but those moves were largely out of desperation - the WRs sucked before Cooper and Gregory being a question mark for 2019 made Quinn essential.

They don't view McCoy as that type of need because they feel they have no issues at DT with Woods, Crawford, Hill, Collins, Ross, Covington, etc.

When was the last time they went out and signed a player for a decent chunk of change that was a starting caliber player who was pretty good like McCoy?

When McCoy can be had for the $6 million you mentioned, you'll have a point. Until such time? It's a poor hypothetical and you don't. It's something you make up to complain about. And there are enough valid gripes to have without resorting to that.