The Argument For Drafting a QB With the 10 Pick

[Loso86]

Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!

Lol

 

[Whirlwin]

Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!

Where did we draft Tony where did we draft Prescott. Not taken one of the first round. Unless we truly think it’s a dead lock . But even one overall isn’t guaranteed

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!

That's why I wanted Romo to be given his job back in the 2016 playoffs. To give Romo a chance to prove he still deserved to start. That little extra push on Romo could have gotten us into a Superbowl, IMO. As they say pressure makes diamonds. And Dak had definitely put some pressure on Romo that year.

But drafting another QB at 10 in this years draft is not good business, IMO. We either wait until the later rounds 4/5 or wait until Dak has one year left on his deal. But player acquisition for these next three years should be all about helping Dak.

 

[JBond]

Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!

He appears to read defenses well. Nice deep ball. None of the videos I watched show a 15 yard out on the money. How is he under pressure? 2rd guy? Maybe 3rd?

 

[Hoofbite]

Peak offseason material here. QB signed, let's draft another! Strong work, OP!

 

[Mannix]

------Dak just received an NFL record new contract. He is not going anywhere anytime soon.

Thank you for ruining my Masters weekend with that thought!

 

[Kingofholland]

Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!

I don't think there's much of an argument to draft a QB at 10. Most if not all the top QBs will be off the board and they just invested a ton in Dak.

 

[George]

So you want to draft a backup at #10.

Well, I guess we should do the same each year as it has been effective. After Dak gets injured, we’ll play out the season with a scrub. Same crap, next year.

 

[Rockport]

Well, I guess we should do the same each year as it has been effective. After Dak gets injured, we’ll play out the season with a scrub. Same crap, next year.

I’m really shocked that there are people like you who actually want to draft a QB with the #10 pick this year. I just don’t get it.

 

[KB1122]

I have an even worse one:

Now that we've drafted a QB #1 overall, let's take another QB in the 1st round of the supplemental draft, even though it looks as though that pick will cost us a top 5 overall in next year's draft.

That "idiotic, stupid, dumb, bird brained, absurd, asinine, crackpot, crazy, nutty, silly, hair brained, foolish, and wacky" idea contributed to three Super Bowls for the Cowboys in the 90's.

We flipped Craig Morton for the pick that became Randy White. How bad were the Giants at that time?

 

[KB1122]

One thing: When the media says things like "5 quarterbacks could go in the top 10 picks!" they almost never do. So it wouldn't be surprising to see one of those five guys slip to the Cowboys pick.

 

[Jake]

The Cowboys are not taking a QB at #10. If you're comparing it to taking Walsh after Aikman I'm not even going to bother explaining the difference. It's obvious.

But if one is there and someone wants to trade up to get him then there's an opportunity to upgrade draft picks, now and next year.

 

[DandyDon52]

And yeah, why did we spend all that money on Dak?

because jerry caved big time!! just like dak and his agent thought he would. The no trade or tag clause is a total cave.
Jerry is still trying to prove he made right decision to promote dak over romo, and jerry is always in win now mode, likes his guys,
and oddly never wants to gamble on someone new or untested.
So he just gave dak everything he wanted to stay.

 

[tyke1doe]

If there were 10 Trevor Lawrences, sure!

 

[DandyDon52]

Given that we just signed Dak to a multi-year mega deal, if we find ourselves in a position to draft a truely franchise worthy QB I would rather we trade down to a QB hungry team and get a stock pile of premium picks.

could we not test drive the new qb, and then trade him next off season for as many or more picks next draft ???????

 

[pansophy]

could we not test drive the new qb, and then trade him next off season for as many or more picks next draft ???????

I don't think so. People give up a lot more when uncertainty about a player's value is at its highest. If a premium QB was on the board still, we would probably get next year's first and some other picks to move down. In comparison, Jimmy Garoppolo took SF to the super bowl, and there are doubts he will garner a 1st rounder in a trade. People give up less when there is certainty about players and their ceiling.

Not to mention most if not all of the QBs drafted will struggle to stay in the league. I see way more value and less risk by trading down.

 

[ghst187]

You would need a draft night Laramy Tunsil gas mask scenario to the nth degree, causing Lawrence to drop like a rock...

kinda the point, about the only good reason to take a QB at ten would be if someone like Lawrence or Aaron Rodgers drops, we whiffed that one

 

[Scottishcowboy]

If there is a QB sitting when we are on the clock, then hang a neon sign above Roger's head saying "pick for sale". I actually think we are in the sweet spot as teams would not want to gamble on waiting to trade further down the order, say with NY at 11.

My logic is NY would surely jump at picking a QB at 11, even though they publicly support Danny "dimes". I would think even his own mum and dad think he's terrible so surely every GM in the league would look at Dallas at 10 and think "can't wait and risk NY picking at 11".

I'm looking forward to the draft so much this year, I hope it's box-office viewing!

 

[csirl]

------Dak just received an NFL record new contract. He is not going anywhere anytime soon.

Thank you for ruining my Masters weekend with that thought!

But Dak's still Dak regardless of how much he is paid.

 

[KB1122]

Have the Cowboys ever traded up for a quarterback? Like, have they ever loved a quarterback in the first round so much that they moved heaven and earth to get that guy? In 30 years of quarterbacks, did they never come across one that they felt so strongly about that they decided they had to do it? That's sad.