The case for going for Lawrence

[ABQCOWBOY]

You can easily fix the defense in the draft if we pay Dak. If he puts up 24 a game and we can be a top 20 defense we win ball games.

How? I think everything you say here is a bunch of pie in the sky. How are you gonna fix this defense in the draft if you pay dak 40? How you gonna do that? You have maybe 2 more years with this team and then you are building again regardless.

 

[CouchCoach]

First off you're another one that wants to lay all the losses at Prescott's feet, especially this season while Prescott was playing the Cowboys defense was 31st and 32nd in the league. For the most part the defense's idea of stopping the other team was when they crossed the goal line and there's only been one offense one time that scored on every series so that's a dream world thought that Prescott didn't score enough points to win.

Next I'm not saying Lawrence will be a bust or nowhere near as dominant in the NFL as he is in college ball, but he wouldn't be the first college player that many to most raved about that did end up as a bust in the NFL. Some just never adapt to the speed of the NFL and/or the speed of NFL defenses.

Before Prescott's injury he was on pace to not just break the NFL passing yardage record but totally smash it. I seriously doubt even the biggest Lawrence fan will say right now he could step in and do that yet you claim right now Lawrence is better than where Prescott was prior to his injury.

I'm not a big McCarthy fan but in you description of him winning only one ring here's what you didn't say. McCarthy's packers went to the playoffs 9 out of 10 years, 8 years in a row and the only other coach to do that is Belicheat. The only year in those 10 years they didn't go to the playoffs Rodgers was injured.

Now getting back to Lawrence. Just about every person in the sporting world says and knows the biggest needs for the Cowboys is on defense but you want to waste the first pick if the Cowboys somehow get it on Lawrence and what makes even less sense is having to use multiple picks probably in multiple years to trade to be able to draft him and that leaves the defense where?

Lastly, I don't know how many times Jones has to say Prescott is his QB and the Cowboys WILL NOT draft any QB's in the first 5 rounds so for fans here to continually start threads trying to push for Lawrence or some other college QB is just a waste of time because of what Jones has said repeatedly.
.
.

First off, I don't start threads based off what that awesome person Booger says, this is for discussion and I don't give a damn what he says because he's got a crappy track record.

I am not laying anything at Prescott's feet and certainly not the losses, it's a team game. I am saying he's not good enough, or consistent enough, to lift this team if that's the type QB it is going to take.

This is nothing but a repeat of the Romo years and he wasn't good enough to lift those teams to the Big Dance. Is Lawrence or Fields or Trask or Lance? Have no idea but I've seen this franchise with this QB and I've seen this movie before.

How much longer will fans wait for this brain trust to build a team when they've proven they're incapable of doing that? It's all about stars so they might as well get the brightest one they can. Dak isn't bright enough.

 

[Diehardblues]

We have to ask ourselves , Would we rather have a Mahomes level of talent? Do we think it could make a difference?

Well, this draft could be that opportunity. It’s a reasonable discussion. It doesn’t have to be a bash on Prescott .

 

[phildadon86]

How? I think everything you say here is a bunch of pie in the sky. How are you gonna fix this defense in the draft if you pay dak 40? How you gonna do that? You have maybe 2 more years with this team and then you are building again regardless.

We have a top 5 pick in the draft currently. You are telling me that we cant fix this? They didnt fix the defense when dak was making 400k.

 

[CouchCoach]

How? I think everything you say here is a bunch of pie in the sky. How are you gonna fix this defense in the draft if you pay dak 40? How you gonna do that? You have maybe 2 more years with this team and then you are building again regardless.

Agree and when has this management "fixed the defense"?

The assumption some make is that money saved will be put to good use, any proof of that?

It's very simple to me. This franchise has a C in talent acquisition and a B at QB, they need an A at QB and not pay a B QB A money. However, that doesn't mean they will get any better at talent, which creates the need of the A QB. This HC had 2 A QB's back to back and got one ring.

Now, are any of these QB's in the draft A's? Don't know but I think it's worth a shot to find out, what do they have to lose? Because until they get that guy, they're not going anywhere.

 

[CouchCoach]

We have to ask ourselves , Would we rather have a Mahomes level of talent? Do we think it could make a difference?

Well, this draft could be that opportunity. It’s a reasonable discussion. It doesn’t have to be a bash on Prescott .

Wasn't intended as a bash on him, he's a good QB. He is not the QB for this team, he needs a better team and he will be better.

It was evident to me that Prescott has Romo disease, which was Elway disease before. They feel they have to win the game, they have to do it and take chances because every possession is critical when there is a mediocre team around them. All we had to see with Romo was the difference when he felt he had a team, like in 2014. He could play within himself but that's still not the warm blankie of a D.

 

[gjkoeppen]

First off, I don't start threads based off what that awesome person Booger says, this is for discussion and I don't give a damn what he says because he's got a crappy track record.

I am not laying anything at Prescott's feet and certainly not the losses, it's a team game. I am saying he's not good enough, or consistent enough, to lift this team if that's the type QB it is going to take.

This is nothing but a repeat of the Romo years and he wasn't good enough to lift those teams to the Big Dance. Is Lawrence or Fields or Trask or Lance? Have no idea but I've seen this franchise with this QB and I've seen this movie before.

How much longer will fans wait for this brain trust to build a team when they've proven they're incapable of doing that? It's all about stars so they might as well get the brightest one they can. Dak isn't bright enough.

It's your opinion on Prescott and you're entitled to that, but that doesn't make it right. You're trying to hold Prescott to an unrealistic goal. With the exception of Mahomes and 20 years ago with Brady how many of the Super Bowl teams had QB's in their first 3 or 4 years of their career? Then how many of the Super Bowl teams had defenses that were ranked in the middle of the pack or lower? You pointed out something I say all the time that it's a team game yet you also do a backhanded dig at Prescott saying he not good enough to lift this team. The implication is there's the QB and then a team game.

Again how many QB's in their first 4 years brought their team to the Super Bowl? Is it because it's the Cowboys that things like that shouldn't matter? You had a problem during the Romo years and now again in the Prescott era and you have a problem with Jones who you seem to think giving him a dissing nickname is somehow make what you say mean more. It just seems to me that with all this unhappiness you have with the Cowboys and how they do things that in the long run you might be happier if you found a different team to be a fan of. Apparently they don't do anything you like so why do you still claim to be a Cowboys fan?
.
.

 

[jaythecowboy]

I trust the Cowboys more to rebuild the defense through the draft than free agency. What was the last big money free agent they brought in that produced? I'd rather they spend there money on Dak.

 

[cern]

How? I think everything you say here is a bunch of pie in the sky. How are you gonna fix this defense in the draft if you pay dak 40? How you gonna do that? You have maybe 2 more years with this team and then you are building again regardless.

the fact you have to ask the question shows you don't understand the process. it's not how much you pay dak, it's how you structure the contract. how were the chiefs able to give mahomes the deal they did and still sign kelce and chris jones??? it was how they structured the deal. and our ranks will be culled during the off season freeing up even more cap money. if we don't spend on free agency, we'll have more than enough money to sign multiple high draft picks, hopefully most of them on defense. and if we do decide to spend in free agency, let's hope it's a big splash, not multiple fingers in the leaky dyke.

 

[cern]

and fyi, the way dak was playing prior to the injury, i'd definitely say he's an A qb. sign him and move on to the draft.

 

[Diehardblues]

Wasn't intended as a bash on him, he's a good QB. He is not the QB for this team, he needs a better team and he will be better.

It was evident to me that Prescott has Romo disease, which was Elway disease before. They feel they have to win the game, they have to do it and take chances because every possession is critical when there is a mediocre team around them. All we had to see with Romo was the difference when he felt he had a team, like in 2014. He could play within himself but that's still not the warm blankie of a D.

Trevor will have the same issues with our dysfunctional organization. We’re just hoping his talent level will be enough to carry us further?

Remember Elway was enough to carry his team to multiple Super Bowl losses without all of the supporting cast. Romo was never that. Is this what you’re hoping Trevor can be?

 

[Bobhaze]

First off, let me say that I like Dak Prescott, I think he is a very good, not great, QB, and even the Dakaters have to notice the team with and without him which is exactly my point. The team needs someone better at that position unless you believe this team's management is capable of doing something they haven't done in decades, build a team around a QB.

They haven't done it with Prescott as well as his predecessor and even admitted that, failed to build around Romo. The fact that they lucked into both of these QB's should also be considered.

There are two questions regarding Trevor Lawrence, three if you consider why he doesn't become an English actor with that name. But the main two are is he better than what the Cowboys have now and what will it take to get him away from the two teams, JAX and NYJ, that have him in their sights?

Now, we must also consider the considerable team that Swinney has built around Lawrence, just as he did Watson. That must be taken into account when considering Fields as well.

But for the sake of argument and this thread, Lawrence is a better QB now than Prescott has developed into and he has nothing but upside. He is the first QB since P. Manning to deliver on being the most highly recruited QB in his class. If you don't agree with this, then this thread doesn't make sense to you but I have watched a lot of Lawrence play the position and consider him the real deal.

The second question is a tough one because if the Cowboys do not end up with the 1st pick, trading up for it will be very expensive in draft capital. If that can even be done. JAX ends up with that and they'd have a hard time passing on Lawrence since he's played in the neighborhood and if they're in that position, we'll see the same response as we saw from the CIN fans when the season became all about Burrow.

OK, you can let me have it now but I just don't think Prescott is good enough to lift this team beyond a mid level team. They ranked #1 in offense and we're 8-8 and what did they look like this season with Prescott at the helm? Is it a risk? Absolutely, but isn't giving Prescott a 4 or 5 X 35-40M a year even a bigger risk when you consider who the team builders are?

This is not about Dak Prescott, I think there are teams he could take to the Big Dance. This is about trying to overcome what's been holding this team back for two and half decades, management.

And if you want to consider something else, this HC had one of the best QB's in the history of the NFL and the most accurate one I have ever seen and he could only get one ring and ended up canned and that team doing better without him.

McC has this rep as a QB guru but who wouldn't with those QB's? The better the QB, the better the guru.

All comes down to one simple question. Do you want more of the same or do you want to take a chance? This is about change but what needs to be changed, management, will not so what's the next best thing?

Great post my friend. I’m a little late to the party so hopefully I’m not covering old ground.

I think the last 25 years have made clear, this management team led by the Naked Emperor himself, does not know how to build a championship roster without a strong head coach to mitigate Jerry’s PT Barnum and pie in the sky habits.

But in 2020, it appears this franchise is facing a crossroads Jerry probably never expected and certainly never wanted. That crossroads centers on these questions:

1. Are we “close” to competing for a championship with Dak as our QB and a few young, talented defensive additions?
2. Or is our roster more depleted than we thought, forcing us to have a longer rebuild at multiple positions?

Let’s be honest- Jerry desperately wants the premise of question 1 to be true. To the point I think he will continue to live in the fantasy that this team has just been “unlucky”, and “once healthy”, it will be relevant again.

IMO, it’s exactly that kind of thinking that has given us the last quarter century.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

We have a top 5 pick in the draft currently. You are telling me that we cant fix this? They didnt fix the defense when dak was making 400k.

Actually, I'm asking you how you propose we fix this team via the draft. Yes, this is what I am asking you and what you are apparently unwilling to answer. Interesting you bring up the idea that the Defense was not fixed before. Well, I'll ask you, how hard did you push for that or did you push for signing Amari to his deal and Drafting Zeke and then paying him big time? Did you push for taking a WR in this last draft with the #1 pick? We already know you are in favor of paying Dak more money then he is worth. Are you a "Market Value" guy?

You have only yourself to blame for not fixing the Defense. No reason to complain now and BTW, have you even kinda come off the idea of paying Dak whatever he wants? You, my friend, are part of the problem with the Defense, you aren't part of the solution.

I get it, you like Dak and you want to pay him but don't come to me and tell me how to fix the D because you don't have a clue. You think that paying Dak and drafting guys will get it done but it won't. You don't have the window to do this and by the time the D comes around, you are going to have to replace or pay Offensive players again and what will you pick then? We have already seen the answer to this.

No, I don't agree with you and you will not convince me that you can or will make the right choices. You, who are on the "pay the man" band wagon have had since before we payed Romo, to fix the Defense and none of you have. Don't lecture me about what this current version of the team has or hasn't done. You all are just as bad.

 

[Bobhaze]

If you believe the biggest issue with the cowboys is the inept management, and you can make a strong argument with that line of thought, what makes you believe this management team will make the right decision during the draft, or at any other crucial time of the season?

This is a fundamental truth in this whole “draft Trevor Lawrence” situation. What evidence do we have that Jerry and his FO are capable of a acquiring a top notch QB and being able to make the right decisions required in a complete rebuild in the cap era? Answer: Zero evidence.

 

[phildadon86]

Actually, I'm asking you how you propose we fix this team via the draft. Yes, this is what I am asking you and what you are apparently unwilling to answer. Interesting you bring up the idea that the Defense was not fixed before. Well, I'll ask you, how hard did you push for that or did you push for signing Amari to his deal and Drafting Zeke and then paying him big time? Did you push for taking a WR in this last draft with the #1 pick? We already know you are in favor of paying Dak more money then he is worth. Are you a "Market Value" guy?

You have only yourself to blame for not fixing the Defense. No reason to complain now and BTW, have you even kinda come off the idea of paying Dak whatever he wants? You, my friend, are part of the problem with the Defense, you aren't part of the solution.

I get it, you like Dak and you want to pay him but don't come to me and tell me how to fix the D because you don't have a clue. You think that paying Dak and drafting guys will get it done but it won't. You don't have the window to do this and by the time the D comes around, you are going to have to replace or pay Offensive players again and what will you pick then? We have already seen the answer to this.

No, I don't agree with you and you will not convince me that you can or will make the right choices. You, who are on the "pay the man" band wagon have had since before we payed Romo, to fix the Defense and none of you have. Don't lecture me about what this current version of the team has or hasn't done. You all are just as bad.

Right. So i cant fix the defense?

Draft

Trade down
Pick up Parsons and Leatherwood in the first.
Second round pick up whichever safety you like. Im partial to Moehrig or Holland
Get the big space eating DT out of Bama to help keep the backers clean.

Looks a lot better doesnt it? And they are all on rookie deals. Im not about to pay Dak whatever he wants. Do i think we should have signed him for 35 million? You're damn right I do. You make it seem like its impossible if we pay him. Its not. Our front office doesnt like defensive players because they dont sell jerseys. So you can blame Dak for the lack of defense if you like. However. The problem lives up in the suite with Tweedle dee and Tweedle dumb.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Agree and when has this management "fixed the defense"?

The assumption some make is that money saved will be put to good use, any proof of that?

It's very simple to me. This franchise has a C in talent acquisition and a B at QB, they need an A at QB and not pay a B QB A money. However, that doesn't mean they will get any better at talent, which creates the need of the A QB. This HC had 2 A QB's back to back and got one ring.

Now, are any of these QB's in the draft A's? Don't know but I think it's worth a shot to find out, what do they have to lose? Because until they get that guy, they're not going anywhere.

If you are going to pay a QB that kind of money, he better be a QB that doesn't require All Pro talent and record setting money at all position to win ball games. He better be the guy who can drive the team to wins with lessor talent and excellent coaching. That is how you win with those guys and we've seen that it can be done. But you can't win if you are cap strapped and playing with only a few players.

It is what it is. To be honest, I am tired of trying to educate fans on what years of football show us. They will either figure it out or not. They surely will not listen to the knowledge or experience of those who have watched this team for 40 or 50 years.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

the fact you have to ask the question shows you don't understand the process. it's not how much you pay dak, it's how you structure the contract. how were the chiefs able to give mahomes the deal they did and still sign kelce and chris jones??? it was how they structured the deal. and our ranks will be culled during the off season freeing up even more cap money. if we don't spend on free agency, we'll have more than enough money to sign multiple high draft picks, hopefully most of them on defense. and if we do decide to spend in free agency, let's hope it's a big splash, not multiple fingers in the leaky dyke.

Well, if this is your opinion, you are welcome to it. However, you know not what you are talking about. You have a window. It's about 2 years, maybe. You have either not payed attention to the conversation or are willingly making the decision to simply ignore the facts of what has been said or discussed.

We've already qualified the fact that the contract must be longer term and stated that Dak would need to accept that. Well, defend your position, what proof can you show that this is what Dak and his camp are willing to do? I'll go a step further, Dak is not Mahomes so even if you can sign him to such a deal, he's still not that guy. But, lets go ahead and put aside all of the short comings on your position. Lets assume Dak will accept a 10 year deal, as you seem to suggest above, lets all act like idiots and just say that he will sign up for that, even though his representation has made it crystal clear that this is not their plan, lets assume this is so. How are you going to fix the Defense in the time you have left?

I'm willing to listen to reason.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Right. So i cant fix the defense?

Draft

Trade down
Pick up Parsons and Leatherwood in the first.
Second round pick up whichever safety you like. Im partial to Moehrig or Holland
Get the big space eating DT out of Bama to help keep the backers clean.

Looks a lot better doesnt it? And they are all on rookie deals. Im not about to pay Dak whatever he wants. Do i think we should have signed him for 35 million? You're damn right I do. You make it seem like its impossible if we pay him. Its not. Our front office doesnt like defensive players because they dont sell jerseys. So you can blame Dak for the lack of defense if you like. However. The problem lives up in the suite with Tweedle dee and Tweedle dumb.

No, you can't. All of this looks great on a message board but there is no guarantee you get any of the players you outline here and futher, they may not turn out to be players at all. So what then? Secondly, no, it doesn't look a lot better. How are you going to draft guys and expect them to just magically produce at a high level in the NFL in their Rookie and Soph year? As I said before, in two more seasons, you start seeing the window close. What are you going to do then?

You talk a lot, you bring up 35 mil but oh wait, the team offered him 35 mil and he turned it down so what now? As I have said, over and over, you can't do a deal a player won't sign.

So tell me, how exactly do you get that part done if the player won't sign?

 

[CouchCoach]

It's your opinion on Prescott and you're entitled to that, but that doesn't make it right. You're trying to hold Prescott to an unrealistic goal. With the exception of Mahomes and 20 years ago with Brady how many of the Super Bowl teams had QB's in their first 3 or 4 years of their career? Then how many of the Super Bowl teams had defenses that were ranked in the middle of the pack or lower? You pointed out something I say all the time that it's a team game yet you also do a backhanded dig at Prescott saying he not good enough to lift this team. The implication is there's the QB and then a team game.

Again how many QB's in their first 4 years brought their team to the Super Bowl? Is it because it's the Cowboys that things like that shouldn't matter? You had a problem during the Romo years and now again in the Prescott era and you have a problem with Jones who you seem to think giving him a dissing nickname is somehow make what you say mean more. It just seems to me that with all this unhappiness you have with the Cowboys and how they do things that in the long run you might be happier if you found a different team to be a fan of. Apparently they don't do anything you like so why do you still claim to be a Cowboys fan?
.
.

Good question, history and laundry. I am not the fan I once was, don't have that passion for the game or this franchise. I have accepted the fact of what they are and how they're run but I still don't have to like it. But thanks for the suggestion I seek my happiness with another team.

As far as nicknames, I do that a lot and before he was Booger, he was Ole Sphincter Face, which do you think he'd prefer? He's an awesome person and I don't like him, I've not hidden that but Murchison wasn't a prince either, but he didn't try and hog the spotlight. Hen wants to be a celebrity, comes with the territory.

And I am not digging at Prescott, under normal circumstances with people who actually know how to build a proper team, he would be fine. Just like Romo could have been fine and you're right, I had this same problem during the Romo years because this problem existed during the Romo years, this very same problem, building a team around a QB. If they can't build a team around the QB, they need a better QB. I have evidence that they can't build a team, irrefutable evidence.

 

[phildadon86]

No, you can't. All of this looks great on a message board but there is no guarantee you get any of the players you outline here and futher, they may not turn out to be players at all. So what then? Secondly, no, it doesn't look a lot better. How are you going to draft guys and expect them to just magically produce at a high level in the NFL in their Rookie and Soph year? As I said before, in two more seasons, you start seeing the window close. What are you going to do then?

You talk a lot, you bring up 35 mil but oh wait, the team offered him 35 mil and he turned it down so what now? As I have said, over and over, you can't do a deal a player won't sign.

So tell me, how exactly do you get that part done if the player won't sign?

So. You are saying the rookie cant come in and make an impact. But want to draft a QB? Who is also a rookie. Interesting.

He didnt turn down 35. He turned down the duration and came to a deal as the deadline closed. The deal is already done. You just have to live with it.