The case for taking Ezekiel Elliot at # 4

[jday]

Trade down to 7, pick up a second rounder, and then grab Elliott.

But they won't do it at 4.

This would be the ideal scenario, but if a trade down option doesn't materialize, and Goff and Ramsey are off the board...what do you do? Pick up yet another offensive lineman in the 1st, which would essentially be an investment for seasons to come, excluding 2016, or make the move that makes an immediate impact on the entire team. For me, whose checks are signed by Jerry Jones, Zeke would be the clear cut choice, regardless of historical draft trends and the overall devaluing of the position.

 

[Sydla]

This would be the ideal scenario, but if a trade down option doesn't materialize, and Goff and Ramsey are off the board...what do you do? Pick up yet another offensive lineman in the 1st, which would essentially be an investment for seasons to come, excluding 2016, or make the move that makes an immediate impact on the entire team. For me, whose checks are signed by Jerry Jones, Zeke would be the clear cut choice, regardless of historical draft trends and the overall devaluing of the position.

Is Wentz there at 4 or is it just Tunsil?

If Wentz is there after the first three picks are Tunsil, Goff and Ramsey, you take Wentz and it shouldn't even take you 10 seconds to run that name up to the podium.

 

[jday]

Don't let those two make any decisions.

Yeah, what does the head coach and offensive coordinator know about football anyway. smh

 

[jday]

Is Wentz there at 4 or is it just Tunsil?

If Wentz is there after the first three picks are Tunsil, Goff and Ramsey, you take Wentz and it shouldn't even take you 10 seconds to run that name up to the podium.

I assume both Goff and Wentz will be gone, but what do I know.

 

[Sydla]

Yeah, what does the head coach and offensive coordinator know about football anyway. smh

Not sure considering those two offensive geniuses could only navigate this team to just one win out of 12 games without Romo.

 

[Stash]

So I guess if that doesn't happen, we can expect to see on the draft cam, Garrett sulking in the corner while being comforted by Charlotte??

I'd hope to not see Garrett on the draft cam at all. Do what's in the best interests of this franchise for the long haul, whether that includes Garrett or not. And if the guy is campaigning for players to save his skin? I'd send him out the door that much quicker.

 

[Sydla]

I assume both Goff and Wentz will be gone, but what do I know.

If Wentz, Goff, Ramsey are gone and we can't trade out of four? Then we are hosed.

 

[Stash]

Yeah, what does the head coach and offensive coordinator know about football anyway. smh

1-11 without Romo bailing them out, and 0-12 if not for Desean Jackson bailing them out, that's what they know.

 

[jday]

Not sure considering those two offensive geniuses couldn't navigate this team to just one win out of 12 games without Romo.

That having been said, I still feel confident they know more than you.

 

[Sydla]

That having been said, I still feel confident they know more than you.

That's not the point. You have to hope Jones and his scouts know more than Garrett.

 

[Stash]

This would be the ideal scenario, but if a trade down option doesn't materialize, and Goff and Ramsey are off the board...what do you do? Pick up yet another offensive lineman in the 1st, which would essentially be an investment for seasons to come, excluding 2016, or make the move that makes an immediate impact on the entire team. For me, whose checks are signed by Jerry Jones, Zeke would be the clear cut choice, regardless of historical draft trends and the overall devaluing of the position.

Sorry, but there's not a scenario where drafting Elliott at #4 "would be the clear cut choice". All it shows is that they screwed up not paying a proven running back in free agency for less money and no draft compensation.

 

[jday]

1-11 without Romo bailing them out, and 0-12 if not for Desean Jackson bailing them out, that's what they know.

Are we speaking in hypothetical's. That's a solid debate style you got there. You should run for president.

 

[jday]

Sorry, but there's not a scenario where drafting Elliott at #4 "would be the clear cut choice". All it shows is that they screwed up not paying a proven running back in free agency for less money and no draft compensation.

Agree to disagree.

 

[Stash]

If Wentz, Goff, Ramsey are gone and we can't trade out of four? Then we are hosed.

Take Tunsil, immensely upgrade over Doug Free and build the greatest offensive line the league has ever seen.

You would at least be giving all of your other offensive skill position players - wherever you drafted them - the very best chance for success.

 

[TheCount]

Zeke would be the clear cut choice, regardless of historical draft trends and the overall devaluing of the position.

That's a lot to throw out the window...

 

[Stash]

Are we speaking in hypothetical's. That's a solid debate style you got there. You should run for president.

What's "hypothetical" about the fact that those two boneheads can't win a thing without Romo?

And the fact is, up until Jackson's muffed punt, Garrett, Linehan, and everyone else involved hadn't won a game without Romo in 5 years!

 

[Stash]

Agree to disagree.

Disagree with the facts surrounding the move all you want. It doesn't change the fact that they're true.

 

[Miller]

That is not a compelling list. If you take the outliers out (Peterson for being a god, Richardson for being a mega bust, Gurley has one season) you're left with a bunch of guys that probably performed similarly to guys taken much later.

Right!!And that is Top 10!!

 

[jday]

That's a lot to throw out the window...

How? Draft trends really mean nothing if you stop to think about. It comes down to 1 thing: how a player is going to help your team. Not 31 other teams; your team. Devaluing of a specific position league wide really shouldn't impact the Cowboys thinking if a Rb of that caliber is critical to success. It really shouldn't. And if it does, at least we will be in the running for Fournette next year and will probably have a new coaching staff to boot.

 

[jday]

What's "hypothetical" about the fact that those two boneheads can't win a thing without Romo?

And the fact is, up until Jackson's muffed punt, Garrett, Linehan, and everyone else involved hadn't won a game without Romo in 5 years!

See the years before Romo. Much the same with a completely different coaching staff. QB's that can run a pro style offense are rare. I know you would love to pidgeon-hole this issue to death and put it all on Garrett/Linehan, but there are a lot of moving parts to a football team and unless the guy responsible gives you a good insurance policy behind Romo, your hands will be tied.