The defense has been playing well

[Bluestang]

There's a gulf between 'not spending much time with him' and 'not scouting him.' Given where he was projected to be drafted, it'd have been surprising if they'd spent a lot of time with him personally. That doesn't mean you don't move up for a guy you thought was unlikely to be there when you have a trade at good value on the board.

Don't know where you got "not scouting him" part. My contention is that they didn't do all of their homework on him and that's pretty risky considering what they gave up to get him.

It's like buying a house for some you aren't going into it just looking at the pictures and saying yea I will take it. You do your research and make a decision based off that research.

The Cowboys didn't do much research.

 

[Idgit]

Don't know where you got "not scouting him" part. My contention is that they didn't do all of their homework on him and that's pretty risky considering what they gave up to get him.

It's like buying a house for some you aren't going into it just looking at the pictures and saying yea I will take it. You do your research and make a decision based off that research.

The Cowboys didn't do much research.

'Much research' and 'all their homework' are relative terms, and I can't disagree. I think they did the amount of scouting you'd expect for one of the top defensive players in the draft for a team picking in the middle of the round. When he was available, it probably was somewhat surprising for them. It doesn't follow necessarily that the scouting they did do was insufficient, though.

Remember, too, Baron was on the board at a position of need. You can be pretty sure we'd scouting him in some detail as he was a player who very possibly could have dropped into range for us. We took Claiborne over Baron at that point, which implies we'd done some level of diligence on the CB.

All that said, I see the traits in Claiborne that justify the top-10 pick, even now. He's struggled mightily with jamming big WRs, and he's struggled with confidence at this level, but he hasn't been a bad player. We like to race to be the first to use the word 'bust' accurately around here, but it's not like the guy doesn't have a chance to develop into a long term starter in Dallas.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

the naivette is astounding. I don't know how anyone can judge a team or unit based on part-time play against another team that might or might not half its first unit in. How someone can judge the defenses' play against a team that might not be revealing its full plate of plays.
at best, the preseason is to see how some athletes are playing, rehabbing and how the team is getting into sync.
Judging a team in the preseason is like test-driving a car around a block and then parking it. You just don't know the full performance, the durability or the caliber of ride in the lonk haul.

Let's judge the D after a couple of real games. Anything less than that is just amateurish dribble.
and I say that with all doo respect.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I don't think like that. At least I don't think of football like that.

I think the argument was supposed to be that you cannot judge them yet if they're bad because they are not healthy yet.

That argument's premise is false. They have played well.

Perhaps you are correct in that we can't yet judge the defense.
Perhaps last year debacle was just a fluke. And maybe this year's defense, with lots of injures and lots of missing pieces (from defections) can't be judge overall.
Well, ah'm gonna judge them for now: On the brink of being the worst (even surpassing last year) defense in our history and possibly in the history of the NFL. (And that includes eras in which the average D lineman wayed 200 pounds and not 300 pounds).
It is called expectations.
And to say this defense can't be judged is like saying (here we goes with analogies) a beat-up car with a bad transmission, rust in the oil and on cinderblocks might be a bad investment. Some things, like Jerra's kool-aid, are to be avoided.
(damn, I'm good.)

 

[Bluestang]

'Much research' and 'all their homework' are relative terms, and I can't disagree. I think they did the amount of scouting you'd expect for one of the top defensive players in the draft for a team picking in the middle of the round. When he was available, it probably was somewhat surprising for them. It doesn't follow necessarily that the scouting they did do was insufficient, though.

Remember, too, Baron was on the board at a position of need. You can be pretty sure we'd scouting him in some detail as he was a player who very possibly could have dropped into range for us. We took Claiborne over Baron at that point, which implies we'd done some level of diligence on the CB.

All that said, I see the traits in Claiborne that justify the top-10 pick, even now. He's struggled mightily with jamming big WRs, and he's struggled with confidence at this level, but he hasn't been a bad player. We like to race to be the first to use the word 'bust' accurately around here, but it's not like the guy doesn't have a chance to develop into a long term starter in Dallas.

I remember the interest in Baron, but Stephen came out and said they would have taken Brockers and Wagner with second pick they gave up in the trade.

The product that Morris Claiborne has put on field thus far isn't worth what we traded for him. Could he breakout this year yea sure maybe but his current body of work doesn't measure up.

The real question is if he's ever going to return the investments they used on him.

 

[Idgit]

I remember the interest in Baron, but Stephen came out and said they would have taken Brockers and Wagner with second pick they gave up in the trade.

The product that Morris Claiborne has put on field thus far isn't worth what we traded for him. Could he breakout this year yea sure maybe but his current body of work doesn't measure up.

The real question is if he's ever going to return the investments they used on him.

I'd say the better question is whether he's worth the current and likely future investments now that the pick six is a sunk cost. He's definitely been a disappointment, and the rest is very debatable at this point.

 

[Sinister]

Let's stop here while/where you are being clear.

The "FRONT 7" argument is bananas.

2007:The first player drafted after BP left was Anthony Spencer.
2008: they drafted only Walden in r6 but he's been a starting 3-4OLB/DE in this league.
The fact he couldn't make it out of camp with Dallas was a testament to our depth at the time.
2009: first pick was a LB(Jason Williams--played in league through last year). also used 2 4th rounders on OLB/DEs.
2010: 2nd pick was Sean Lee, also picked up Lissemore. Added Brent in Supp draft.
2011: 2nd pick was Bruce Carter.
2012: 2nd pick was Crawford, 3rd pick was Wilber
2013 brought only Holloman
2014: used 2nd pick and a 1st rounder on DLaw.

SOOOOOO.. to be CLEAR since BP left Dallas has used it's first or second draft selection on a front 7 player SIX out of the EIGHT years.

As to the moving around, that's almost fair. Except they have traded both up AND down. They hardly have hit on every trade or every pick but the overall haul has not been bad.
The DL arguments have now morphed to whinging about DT which is hilarious because we didn't employ a DT until last year. We used DE and a single NT.
3 years ago with Ratliff backed up by Brent we had arguably the best NT depth chart in football.

2008: FYI Walden was beat out by Justin Rogers that year.

2009: Do we really want to talk about this draft? Maybe it was just a bad memory you must have blocked it out because you certainly didn't mention it in your post. We didn't have a 1st or 2nd round pick. Does anyone remember why? Try, because it is pretty important.

Also Canty was signed by the Giants that year and he was replaced by Igor Olshansky.

Our defensive front seven picks that year were the celebrated first pick of that draft (third rounder) linebacker Jason Williams, linebacker Victor Butler and Defensive End Brandon Williams.

The problem with this year is that this draft absolutely depleted the Cowboys depth. The only viable players by the end of the year on the defensive front seven were; Jay Ratliff, Anthony Spencer, Demarcus Ware, and to a lesser extant Jason Hatcher who was dealing with injuries throughout the year.

The 2009 draft was a disaster. The Cowboys defensive front seven never recovered.

Yes, I realize the Cowboys used DE and NT in the 3-4 scheme yet somehow they ended up with a bunch of Igor Olshansky's, Clifton Geathers and Kenyon Colemans.

Ratliff backed up by Brent we had arguably the best NT depth chart? Laughable, it's just not true, wishing something to be true does not make it so. Let's be honest Josh Brent flashed, but was never dominant, Ratliff was always an undersized NT, who for whatever reason refused to play DE so our two best Defensive Lineman were almost never on the field at the same time.

Not only was Ratliff undersized, but he was victimized in the running game, especially as the game wore on. By the end of each season Ratliff was consistently, inconsistent.

"Proof is in the pudding", the 2012 injury fest proved that his team was not deep in the defensive front seven. Blame it on bad luck, blame it on disgruntled players. I blame the Cowboys front office for not being able to see the "forest for the trees'.

 

[jterrell]

2008: FYI Walden was beat out by Justin Rogers that year.

2009: Do we really want to talk about this draft? Maybe it was just a bad memory you must have blocked it out because you certainly didn't mention it in your post. We didn't have a 1st or 2nd round pick. Does anyone remember why? Try, because it is pretty important.

Also Canty was signed by the Giants that year and he was replaced by Igor Olshansky.

Our defensive front seven picks that year were the celebrated first pick of that draft (third rounder) linebacker Jason Williams, linebacker Victor Butler and Defensive End Brandon Williams.

The problem with this year is that this draft absolutely depleted the Cowboys depth. The only viable players by the end of the year on the defensive front seven were; Jay Ratliff, Anthony Spencer, Demarcus Ware, and to a lesser extant Jason Hatcher who was dealing with injuries throughout the year.

The 2009 draft was a disaster. The Cowboys defensive front seven never recovered.

Yes, I realize the Cowboys used DE and NT in the 3-4 scheme yet somehow they ended up with a bunch of Igor Olshansky's, Clifton Geathers and Kenyon Colemans.

Ratliff backed up by Brent we had arguably the best NT depth chart? Laughable, it's just not true, wishing something to be true does not make it so. Let's be honest Josh Brent flashed, but was never dominant, Ratliff was always an undersized NT, who for whatever reason refused to play DE so our two best Defensive Lineman were almost never on the field at the same time.

Not only was Ratliff undersized, but he was victimized in the running game, especially as the game wore on. By the end of each season Ratliff was consistently, inconsistent.

"Proof is in the pudding", the 2012 injury fest proved that his team was not deep in the defensive front seven. Blame it on bad luck, blame it on disgruntled players. I blame the Cowboys front office for not being able to see the "forest for the trees'.

You didn't type a single thing that has any relevance to your CLEAR point that Dallas doesn't invest in it's front 7 post BP.
They clearly DO invest in the front 7 and quite heavily.

I didn't cover the Free Agents they've added to the front 7 tho you seem eager to discuss which is hilarious because it signals even more investment.

 

[Sinister]

You didn't type a single thing that has any relevance to your CLEAR point that Dallas doesn't invest in it's front 7 post BP.
They clearly DO invest in the front 7 and quite heavily.

I didn't cover the Free Agents they've added to the front 7 tho you seem eager to discuss which is hilarious because it signals even more investment.

I guess you're right, the Cowboys do invest in the front seven, looking over the draft history it is easy to see where the Cowboys made mistakes and while I don't agree that they invest "quite heavily" or with quality, I do agree that they do invest. Even if it is a bunch of 7th round, and UDFA's who rarely leave a mark.

Point taken.

 

[Bluestang]

Front 7 and DL are two different things.

I'd argue that if your DL was poor having 3 Sean Lees at LB isn't going to help your defense if they losing the battle ar the LOS.

Premium picks were not spent on DL until Crawford and then Lawrence post Bill Parcells.

The question people are asking is why did we not invest in anything behind Ware, Spencer, Ratliff?

If the front office really believed in the mantra games are won in the trenches than why did they invest in WRs, TEs, CBs, with the premium picks? Their draft history doesn't suggest that, and their philosophies/scheme are changing from year to year so what consistency are they building?

What we saw that happened with the OL Parcells built and then when the players got old is what we are seeing with the DL now. One of the familiar obstacles I see is that like before we are trying to bargain bin FA shop to fix the DL because we don't have salary cap dollars to invest in a premium FA. The same salary cap issues we faced then, we face now because of how the cap is being managed.

 

[jterrell]

Front 7 and DL are two different things.

I'd argue that if your DL was poor having 3 Sean Lees at LB isn't going to help your defense if they losing the battle ar the LOS.

Premium picks were not spent on DL until Crawford and then Lawrence post Bill Parcells.

The question people are asking is why did we not invest in anything behind Ware, Spencer, Ratliff?

If the front office really believed in the mantra games are won in the trenches than why did they invest in WRs, TEs, CBs, with the premium picks? Their draft history doesn't suggest that, and their philosophies/scheme are changing from year to year so what consistency are they building?

What we saw that happened with the OL Parcells built and then when the players got old is what we are seeing with the DL now. One of the familiar obstacles I see is that like before we are trying to bargain bin FA shop to fix the DL because we don't have salary cap dollars to invest in a premium FA. The same salary cap issues we faced then, we face now because of how the cap is being managed.

First, Front 7 wasn't my term but his. And that is fatally flawed considering the very heavy investment in high picks on the front 7.
There is NO debate there. The front 7 has been highly invested in every way. Salary, draft picks, FAs.

As to DL again that is a childish semantic argument that follows Sturm's logic where 3-4 OLB that now play DE are not a part of the count somehow.
Pass rushers count against DL.

You only get so many premium picks. (Sturm has hilariously moved between first 2 rounds to top 80 players to make his argument and lead naive fans astray)
So first you have to define premium. I'd argue top 2 rounds is fair. Maybe top 3. I am not splitting rounds with an absurd 75-80 number though.
Let's assume it is top 2 rounds.

Let's start with a nice round number say 2005:
Which is arguably the greatest DL draft in the history of the team.
Ware, Spears, Canty, Ratliff
Top 2 rounds included Ware and Spears in round 1. 2nd was Burnett. DLx2, LB

2006: Final BP year and we get Bobby Carpenter in r1. Supposedly an OLB in a 3-4. 2nd was Fasano. DL, TE **counting Carpenter because at OSU he was known as a pressure guy with 14.5 sacks and 23.5 stops behind the line of scrimmage.
2007: First Wade pick was Anthony Spencer in r1. no 2nd. DL
2008: top 2 rounds DB, RB, TE
2009: no picks
2010: Dez and Sean Lee WR, LB
2011: Tyron, Carter OL, LB
2012: Mo DB
2013: Tfred, Escobar OL, TE
2014: Zach, DLaw OL, DL

So 18 picks in first two rounds over 9 years.. i.e. what you get by default.
Of that 5 are DL. 3 are TE, 3 are LB, 3 are OL, 1 RB, 1 WR, 2 DB

So you wanna discuss post BP right? That's the simpleminded argument that ignores just how much investment we had on the DL and what players we had there but alas that is the cry we still can.
We drop to 14 picks.
3 OL, 3 TE, 2 LB, 2 DL, 2 DB, 1 RB, 1 WR

The part of the argument that drives me crazy if we've had good DL come through here who were cut, released, allowed to leave.
This team did not lack quality DL UNTIL last year.
Walden was a solid pass rusher but we cut him in camp because he coudn't play special teams.
We let Canty go to NYG because we paid Ratliff instead.
We couldn't find a spot for Carpenter because he A, sucked and B was never gonna beat out who we had inside or out.
We lost Bowen and others because we didn't have room for them.
The entire cry comes down to we sucked on the DL last year after a bunch of injuries and crazy off field nonsense form Ratliff and Brent.
It is absurd.

It's like saying the Packers suck at QB because they were scrambling around once Aaron Rodgers went down.

The team philosophy is changing? Is it? Or are they addressing weaknesses and drafting what help they most need?
When OL went to pot we drafted a lot of OL.
The fact it had been a top 10 unit for a long time without a lot of high draft picks is probably why we didn't see a lot of high choices used there until it got bad perhaps?

When you draft Ware, Ratliff, Spears, Canty then follow that with Hatcher and Spencer within a couple years later perhaps it wouldn't make much since to use high draft picks on guys that would be back ups.

The 1 WR they drafted was Dez Bryant. He has a chance to be a Hall of Famer. Wanna really question that pick at 24??

The only reasonable objection is to TE. That is the outlier and hard to understand. But Marty B was essentially a 3rd OT here. He was flat outstanding for our run game.
Escobar has WR skills and has a chance to be special going forward as Witten ages but I don't think any of us desired a TE in that spot.
The overall argument is just childish and ignorant of fact.
Yes, the team was very bad on the DL last year.
The protection for that was supposed to be what? Having 3rd string guys that can really play drafted int he top 2 rounds sitting on the bench waiting on a scheme change and injuries???

 

[Bluestang]

First, Front 7 wasn't my term but his. And that is fatally flawed considering the very heavy investment in high picks on the front 7.
There is NO debate there. The front 7 has been highly invested in every way. Salary, draft picks, FAs.

As to DL again that is a childish semantic argument that follows Sturm's logic where 3-4 OLB that now play DE are not a part of the count somehow.
Pass rushers count against DL.

You only get so many premium picks. (Sturm has hilariously moved between first 2 rounds to top 80 players to make his argument and lead naive fans astray)
So first you have to define premium. I'd argue top 2 rounds is fair. Maybe top 3. I am not splitting rounds with an absurd 75-80 number though.
Let's assume it is top 2 rounds.

Let's start with a nice round number say 2005:
Which is arguably the greatest DL draft in the history of the team.
Ware, Spears, Canty, Ratliff
Top 2 rounds included Ware and Spears in round 1. 2nd was Burnett. DLx2, LB

2006: Final BP year and we get Bobby Carpenter in r1. Supposedly an OLB in a 3-4. 2nd was Fasano. DL, TE **counting Carpenter because at OSU he was known as a pressure guy with 14.5 sacks and 23.5 stops behind the line of scrimmage.
2007: First Wade pick was Anthony Spencer in r1. no 2nd. DL
2008: top 2 rounds DB, RB, TE
2009: no picks
2010: Dez and Sean Lee WR, LB
2011: Tyron, Carter OL, LB
2012: Mo DB
2013: Tfred, Escobar OL, TE
2014: Zach, DLaw OL, DL

So 18 picks in first two rounds over 9 years.. i.e. what you get by default.
Of that 5 are DL. 3 are TE, 3 are LB, 3 are OL, 1 RB, 1 WR, 2 DB

So you wanna discuss post BP right? That's the simpleminded argument that ignores just how much investment we had on the DL and what players we had there but alas that is the cry we still can.
We drop to 14 picks.
3 OL, 3 TE, 2 LB, 2 DL, 2 DB, 1 RB, 1 WR

Once you factor out Parcell's draft, you get in the middle of the road of where we took a DL in those first two rounds. Parcells completely changed this franchise, so I tend to give him his credit here.

And to add more than that it was a 7 yr span before we did it again. 7 years, without taking a 34 OLB or 4-3 DE to groom behind the big name starters. This league is not nick named Not For Long just because.

Want to take any guesses as to how many other NFL teams have gone that long without taking a prospect in those 1st two rounds?

The part of the argument that drives me crazy if we've had good DL come through here who were cut, released, allowed to leave.
This team did not lack quality DL UNTIL last year.

And slowly but surely, the signs were there weren't they?

The frequent injuries to Ware and the locker room fight between Ratliff and Jones/the hit and run deal. Spencer's injury could not be predicted but again there was nothing that we could rely on in case anyone of one of those guys went down. I'd even throw in Hatcher's late emergence too but that by might be stretch because he didn't do anything worthwhile early in his career. It wasn't until he was in his contract year that he put alot of emphasis on his own offseason workouts. And that's a different topic there.

Walden was a solid pass rusher but we cut him in camp because he coudn't play special teams.

Would you rather have a pass rusher, or a special teams ace?

We let Canty go to NYG because we paid Ratliff instead.

And yet money was being mismanaged in other position groups, much like it is today. Canty did alot of dirty work for the Giants enroute to winning a SB. Canty was a guy that was under appreciated here because he didn't get the flashy stats but he sure did help Ware alot.

We couldn't find a spot for Carpenter because he A, sucked and B was never gonna beat out who we had inside or out.
We lost Bowen and others because we didn't have room for them.

Bobby was a bust, and that is Parcells issue. Bowen on the other hand, was the guy that Rob Ryan really wanted back when he first got here and evaluated all the players on defense. Wanna guess why we didn't have the money to offer him?

The entire cry comes down to we sucked on the DL last year after a bunch of injuries and crazy off field nonsense form Ratliff and Brent.
It is absurd.

It's like saying the Packers suck at QB because they were scrambling around once Aaron Rodgers went down.

Brent is an extenuating circumstance, but he also had a prior history and I wouldn't even doubt that the front office already knew he was drinking and driving during their off time in the season.

And it just wasn't those two either, because Ware was getting nicked up alot, Spencer was already out after Week 2 of last year. And not one guy that we had drafted in the later rounds had at least shown the coaches any confidence that he could be a starter.

But that goes back to that 7 year span and not having any salary cap money to bring a quality vet to provide the depth we sorely lacked.

The team philosophy is changing? Is it? Or are they addressing weaknesses and drafting what help they most need?
When OL went to pot we drafted a lot of OL.

They tried to address it with David Arkin, Bill Nagy, Kowalski, Phil Costa, Livings, Barron, Dockery first. Credit them that they took Smith too. It took them all those guys to finally figure it out that you need to draft guys that are considered top prospects to have a good OL.

The fact it had been a top 10 unit for a long time without a lot of high draft picks is probably why we didn't see a lot of high choices used there until it got bad perhaps?

And how do you maintain a top 10 unit?

When you draft Ware, Ratliff, Spears, Canty then follow that with Hatcher and Spencer within a couple years later perhaps it wouldn't make much since to use high draft picks on guys that would be back ups.

31 NFL GMs disagree with you here.

The 1 WR they drafted was Dez Bryant. He has a chance to be a Hall of Famer. Wanna really question that pick at 24??

The only reasonable objection is to TE. That is the outlier and hard to understand. But Marty B was essentially a 3rd OT here. He was flat outstanding for our run game.
Escobar has WR skills and has a chance to be special going forward as Witten ages but I don't think any of us desired a TE in that spot.
The overall argument is just childish and ignorant of fact.
Yes, the team was very bad on the DL last year.
The protection for that was supposed to be what? Having 3rd string guys that can really play drafted int he top 2 rounds sitting on the bench waiting on a scheme change and injuries???

Bennett was a huge bust no matter how you look at that. If you look at where the top money is going on this team you'll see why we have journeyman on the DL. The facts are that this team can't bring in quality FA vets because they are constantly eating dead money and having to restructure more money into future years just to get under the current years salary cap. And then when those restructured players are cut, they cost more in dead money because of the restructure.

How many offseason threads are created each season where somebody is looking at a top name guy and we sit there two weeks into FA and are getting the guys that other teams are releasing?

 

[Sinister]

For 7yrs the team threw the proverbial "stuff" against the wall to see what would stick. Nothing did and now they are left without a defensive line.

 

[Idgit]

For 7yrs the team threw the proverbial "stuff" against the wall to see what would stick. Nothing did and now they are left without a defensive line.

That's not how I'd characterize it.