The real cause of a lot of our problems - bad drafts

[fortdick]

I really don't see all that many problems. Secondary could be better, as could pass rush, but if Romo and Dez are ready, we will win 11 or 12 games this season.

 

[DogFace]

Saying that the Cowboys lost Murray in the same way that they lost Romo and Bryant is intellectually dishonest. They chose to let Murray go. Same with Randle later. Technically, they lost two guys - same as the Steelers.

How many games did they miss as opposed to Bryant and Romo missing almost the entire season?

Bryant was also a major matchup problem for any team we played. Opening up holes for other players to exploit. Bell is good but, he didn't change the game the way Bryant did. He was well on his way to being the top receiver in the league.

Our coaches could've done a better job and won a couple more of the many close games we were in. This would've infuriated some many of the same people who are now saying we should've won more.

 

[DogFace]

Name me the last team that lost a total of 35 combined games from their TOP QB, WR, and RB from the previous season and made the playoffs.

I'll wait..................

I'll add top cover guy and wait with you.

 

[CowboyRoy]

There's a lot of valid points there. I won't argue that for a moment. However, I was quoting rocket scientist that made the absurd proclamation that Romo was the only loss that affected the horrible offensive output and that somehow coaching is going to magically dig you out of that hole.

I've said before and I'll say it again: There's no excuse for only winning one game in the absence of your QB. It was a failure on every level. From the water boy, to the top of the food chain. It was such an epic failure that the blame simply cannot be laid solely at the feet of the coaching staff. Should they share their fair part in the blame? You bet. But this failure was so epic and on such a grand scale that focusing solely on the coaching staff and laying the blame completely at their feet is also a failure of epic levels (I realize that it is NOT what you're intimating TO ME, as you've stated in your post). But, the post that you quoted of mine was in response to a poster who used the simple minded and shallow myopic view of the entire situation because he's either too lazy to think any farther than that level, simply posted it for the sake of regurgitating the same things he's posted ad naseum for months on end (as if we hadn't read it from him 1000 times before), or too stupid to comprehend anything more complex.

We basically lost Romo, Dez, and Murray all in the same year. It killed us.

 

[Craig]

How many games did they miss as opposed to Bryant and Romo missing almost the entire season?

Bryant was also a major matchup problem for any team we played. Opening up holes for other players to exploit. Bell is good but, he didn't change the game the way Bryant did. He was well on his way to being the top receiver in the league.

Our coaches could've done a better job and won a couple more of the many close games we were in. This would've infuriated some many of the same people who are now saying we should've won more.

Bell stands out vs his peers more than bryant. He is already knocking on the door as best back in the league.

 

[Plankton]

How many games did they miss as opposed to Bryant and Romo missing almost the entire season?

Bryant was also a major matchup problem for any team we played. Opening up holes for other players to exploit. Bell is good but, he didn't change the game the way Bryant did. He was well on his way to being the top receiver in the league.

Our coaches could've done a better job and won a couple more of the many close games we were in. This would've infuriated some many of the same people who are now saying we should've won more.

Bell missed 10 games, Roethlisberger missed 4 games. Romo missed 12, Bryant 7.

I wouldn't minimize how good of a player Le'Veon Bell is. He may be the best all around running back in the league (Peterson is a better pure runner, but Bell is far superior as a receiver and blocker).

 

[erod]

is bad drafting. this past season and all the injuries and losses to room, dez and loss of murray showed how thin this team was as opposed to deep.

and a lot of that falls on the shoulder of scouting. and some will argue with coaches developing players. or both.

for what ever reason dallas has done well in the first round. hitting on most players. 2nd round is 50/50 so far. with Lawrence seemingly a hit, but book is out on Crawford. lee is good but often injured. carter was a bust. Gregory was top 10 talent but risky and it shows with him being suspended for 4 games in his second season in the league.

I would venture to say that scouting is good on first round type talent, including lee who dropped because of injury concerns and same with Gregory. dallas has shown they will take risks on top talent in the 2nd round if nothing else.

past 2nd round our draft record is awful. the only player of significance is Murray. we haven't drafted a player of significance in the past 5 years past 2nd round. and that's where you build depth and have to hit on one or two to ake it over the top, given that the 1st and 2nd round talent resource is pretty much the same for all NFL teams.



so is that the fault of scouting dept? or coaching? I think we just haven't done a good job of scouting in recent years under mcclay. prior to him we found an Orlando scandrick and James "Rat" ratlieff, doug free....

Ridiculous. The Cowboys have drafted better than most teams in the past five years.

There's this notion that other teams draft pro bowlers in 3rd round and on, which is bogus. When you get guys like Hitchens, Wilcox, Church, Lewis, Williams, Hanna.....that's actually pretty solid drafting.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

How many starters has the league drafted in rounds 4-7 in the last 5 years on average. If the argument is that we have been bad when compared to the rest of the league, it has to include the rest of the league.

its not about starters...its about quality, contributing starters...

AZ has drafted John Brown,
Carolina has drafted Josh norman, greg hardy, dan connor,
Denver has drafted, Julius Thomas, malik jackson

Let's see...Myles Austin, Beasley, Church, Wilcox, Bailey, Harris - that went to a NFC East rival...those were starters and contributers. Good returns.

not to bad. no denying that.....Beasley!? book is still out on him. less than average at this point, but certainly a fan favorite. church is average at best. we have been trying to upgrade safety for years now. Wilcox was drafted...in the 4th I believe. and he sucks. harris was drafted...in the 4th I believe. good return man. role player. not much contributor as WR. baily...good pick up. dallas has taken the approach of finding kickers/punters through FA and developing them.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Name me the last team that lost a total of 35 combined games from their TOP QB, WR, and RB from the previous season and made the playoffs.

I'll wait..................

probably none. not sure why you are hammering that point? everyone agrees that losing those three contributed to the dismal season.

but it also exposed a lot. we have no depth. we are not that talented. and the depth sucks. not only that, what's the excuse for the poor defensive performance.....teams like Indy, Steelers lost players but foundn ways to win. other playoff teams find stars and probowlers in lower rounds....that's the point I am trying to make. we have found no start type players in rounds 3-7.....

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Ridiculous. The Cowboys have drafted better than most teams in the past five years.

There's this notion that other teams draft pro bowlers in 3rd round and on, which is bogus. When you get guys like Hitchens, Wilcox, Church, Lewis, Williams, Hanna.....that's actually pretty solid drafting.

not all the teams draft probowlers in the 3rd round and below. good teams tend to find them, every 2-3 or 4 years....Denver, seattle, GB, NE, Pittsburgh......and all you need is to hit on one or two and it makes world of difference....my point we found players like scandrick, Rat...but under mcclay our 3rd down and below drafting has been awful....just awful....

also those teams tend to have done better in FA as well....Denver had specially been very shrewed

 

[DogFace]

Bell missed 10 games, Roethlisberger missed 4 games. Romo missed 12, Bryant 7.

I wouldn't minimize how good of a player Le'Veon Bell is. He may be the best all around running back in the league (Peterson is a better pure runner, but Bell is far superior as a receiver and blocker).

A stud receiver, one of the leagues best, is harder to replace than a RB. Imo. Bryant missed 7 but should have missed more and wasn't the same. The games they both missed together is another factor. If Ben missed 12 games they would not have made the playoffs. Even if Bell played the whole year.

I think we were 3-1 in Romo's starts. That's good. Losing a QB, inarguably the most valuable position, for 12 games would be very hard for any team to overcome.

We also lost our best cover man for the year.

 

[DogFace]

Bell stands out vs his peers more than bryant. He is already knocking on the door as best back in the league.

That's incorrect.

 

[erod]

not all the teams draft probowlers in the 3rd round and below. good teams tend to find them, every 2-3 or 4 years....Denver, seattle, GB, NE, Pittsburgh......and all you need is to hit on one or two and it makes world of difference....my point we found players like scandrick, Rat...but under mcclay our 3rd down and below drafting has been awful....just awful....

also those teams tend to have done better in FA as well....Denver had specially been very shrewed

Hitchens, Lewis, Green, Williams....

You have to give it a bit more time. McClay hasn't had the reins that long.

 

[CCBoy]

its not about starters...its about quality, contributing starters...

AZ has drafted John Brown,
Carolina has drafted Josh norman, greg hardy, dan connor,
Denver has drafted, Julius Thomas, malik jackson


not to bad. no denying that.....Beasley!? book is still out on him. less than average at this point, but certainly a fan favorite. church is average at best. we have been trying to upgrade safety for years now. Wilcox was drafted...in the 4th I believe. and he sucks. harris was drafted...in the 4th I believe. good return man. role player. not much contributor as WR. baily...good pick up. dallas has taken the approach of finding kickers/punters through FA and developing them.

Of course, there is Tony Romo and La'el Collins as well. Quite a lot of contributors from non drafted sources. And that includes starters. A pretty good return when considering contributions lower in the draft or afterwards. You can add Lucky Whitehead as well.

But let's go ahead and to Church, add in Ronald Leary and Lance Dunbar as well.

I was wrong about Wilcox, sorry, he was drafted in the 3rd round.

As to Dwayne Harris, he was in deed drafted by Dallas in the 6th round...but at least he was a low range player contributing. But I think the recently current Dallas roster reflects a pretty strong tend in due diligence in the lower rounds and undrafted players added.

This training camp will determine actual percentages of success, but that is a competitive process, and not just selective.

 

[Craig]

That's incorrect.

Oh sorry. He is already the best back in the league then.

 

[dogunwo]

I feel like it is an exercise in stupidity when someone wants to not include UDFAs because they were not drafted. So what? It's the same scouting process, and even harder to hit on them. Would you feel better if you swapped the 7th rounders and free agents so you can say we are better at drafting? Well then you'd be a dumb*** because it is all rookie talent acquisition, and you are just trying to satisfy your agenda. To me, it's even harder to get those players because they have to be "recruited" if they are decent, rather than having no choice when drafted.

 

[BigStar]

I think if you compare the NFL as a whole we're probably in the middle when it comes to drafting. Some are better. Pittsburg Seattle Carolina.. Bad coaching is the real problem.

It can be both We don't tend to make the smartest decisions and reach ALOT after round 2. Crawford being an overpaid recent exception.

 

[BigStar]

I feel like it is an exercise in stupidity when someone wants to not include UDFAs because they were not drafted. So what? It's the same scouting process, and even harder to hit on them. Would you feel better if you swapped the 7th rounders and free agents so you can say we are better at drafting? Well then you'd be a dumb*** because it is all rookie talent acquisition, and you are just trying to satisfy your agenda. To me, it's even harder to get those players because they have to be "recruited" if they are decent, rather than having no choice when drafted.

If your scouts deemed them good players, why choose bad ones instead and then wait for UDFA? Strategery!

 

[DEA_dad]

I really don't see all that many problems. Secondary could be better, as could pass rush, but if Romo and Dez are ready, we will win 11 or 12 games this season.

Well as of right now its Cowboys day, 4 and 12 outta 16

 

[Idgit]

I feel like it is an exercise in stupidity when someone wants to not include UDFAs because they were not drafted. So what? It's the same scouting process, and even harder to hit on them. Would you feel better if you swapped the 7th rounders and free agents so you can say we are better at drafting? Well then you'd be a dumb*** because it is all rookie talent acquisition, and you are just trying to satisfy your agenda. To me, it's even harder to get those players because they have to be "recruited" if they are decent, rather than having no choice when drafted.

If your scouts deemed them good players, why choose bad ones instead and then wait for UDFA? Strategery!

Teams routinely do this. They'll pass on a higher-rated player in the late rounds that they think is more likely to go undrafted for whatever physical or personal background reasons and they'll take guys they have lower rankings on that they link are less likely to make it to CFA. Steven Jones talked about it, I think it was after the Ken Bishop draft when they had Davon Coleman as the higher rated player (I may have the players mixed up, but you get the idea). It's a chess game.

Either way, dogunwo is obviously correct, and it's a point I've made several times. Same scouts, same scouting trip, same effort, same ranking, same process. To pretend they're different somehow to make the haul look worse is silly. The only difference is that Dallas probably has a benefit when it comes to attracting FA because we're a very popular franchise with a history of actually playing UDFAs.