We can get Berry.

[jchap]

Yeah lets take a great NFL prospect with a good contract situation and trade it for a good college tallent that might turn into a bust with a huge top 5 contract. That sounds like a great idea!

 

[TNCowboy]

I'm a UT fan, love Eric Berry, and think he'll be a terrific pro.

But if I'm trading into the top 5, it's not for a safety. It's for a QB, a LT, or a pass rusher.

 

[Alexander]

Berry along with Mike Hamlin would solve are safety issues (finally) for years to come. If it where possible to trade up and get him, I would do it in a heartbeat. He is that good.

So he's that good.

Is he going to block? Is he going to stop the run? Is he going to catch the ball? No. He's going to be yet another selection in a secondary that in the last ten years has had no less than five choices dedicated to it in the first two rounds with less than stellar payoff.

Eventually we have to get out of the mode that an all-world safety is the tonic to what we need.

If we ended up with a two firsts and one in the top five, I am taking the best available player. If it is Berry, so be it. All I know is if I have a top five choice, I try my best to parlay it into additional choices.

Safeties are very difficult to evaluate at the college level. And there are too many cases where "the next Ed Reed" simply isn't. And BTW, Ed Reed wasn't a top five choice either. In fact, among safeties in the top ten, here is a list to consider:

2007 - LaRon Landry. Yes, he is really making an impact on the Washington defense, now isn't he? Wait, no he isn't.
2006 - Mike Huff. I really could use him as the posterchild for why "beasts" at safety that people thought were so great can be completely ineffective.
2004 - Sean Taylor. Despite the marytrdom, was he the next Ronnie Lott? No. Very good. But again, not a player that made a defense.
2002 - Roy Williams. For his first two years, yes, an impact player. Since? Not quite.
1991 - Eric Turner. This is the player who never lived up to the hype. I seem to think Berry is getting the same kind of overinflation.
1991 - Stanley Richard. He was Michael Huff before Michael Huff.
1990 - Mark Carrier. Solid player, again, where was the impact.
1988 - Bennie Blades. See above.

We have exactly one in Taylor and even he is highly debateable. Add Williams if you want. That is still 2 out of 8. Not exactly great odds.

Great safeties can be acquired much lower than the top five in a draft. If Berry is a hands-down rock solid top five, chances are you have a weak upper end of the draft. The game's best safeties historically haven't been top ten choices. They can be acquired much later if a team is smart about it.

 

[Rudy]

There is no way the Browns are trading a top 5 pick for Martellus Bennett, unless we throw in Dexter Coakley.

 

[Silverstar]

It's a safe bet, that Flozell Adams and Marcus Spears aren't going to be Cowboys next year.

So, I'd go after players like LT Anthony Davis 6-6 335 or DL Arthur Jones 6-4 295 in the bottom of the 1st.


If we could trade Bennett and get both players in the 1st round....I'd might take that though.

 

[EPL0c0]

Just like the talk about getting rid of one of the RBs.... WHY?!

Man, we have quality DEPTH at a position, WHY do some folks see that as an opportunity to have a fire sale? It's not his fault (IMO) that he's being under-/mis-used. He's as athletic if not more than Witten. He just needs to opportunities to develop his skills further.

Plus, I'd feel better about having Bennett there should something (heaven forbid) happen to Witten than a 3rd-string-elevated-to-2nd-by-trade TE taking his place. ..just my 2 cents.

 

[JonJon]

So he's that good.

Is he going to block? Is he going to stop the run? Is he going to catch the ball? No. He's going to be yet another selection in a secondary that in the last ten years has had no less than five choices dedicated to it in the first two rounds with less than stellar payoff.

Eventually we have to get out of the mode that an all-world safety is the tonic to what we need.

If we ended up with a two firsts and one in the top five, I am taking the best available player. If it is Berry, so be it. All I know is if I have a top five choice, I try my best to parlay it into additional choices.

Safeties are very difficult to evaluate at the college level. And there are too many cases where "the next Ed Reed" simply isn't. And BTW, Ed Reed wasn't a top five choice either. In fact, among safeties in the top ten, here is a list to consider:

2007 - LaRon Landry. Yes, he is really making an impact on the Washington defense, now isn't he? Wait, no he isn't.
2006 - Mike Huff. I really could use him as the posterchild for why "beasts" at safety that people thought were so great can be completely ineffective.
2004 - Sean Taylor. Despite the marytrdom, was he the next Ronnie Lott? No. Very good. But again, not a player that made a defense.
2002 - Roy Williams. For his first two years, yes, an impact player. Since? Not quite.
1991 - Eric Turner. This is the player who never lived up to the hype. I seem to think Berry is getting the same kind of overinflation.
1991 - Stanley Richard. He was Michael Huff before Michael Huff.
1990 - Mark Carrier. Solid player, again, where was the impact.
1988 - Bennie Blades. See above.

We have exactly one in Taylor and even he is highly debateable. Add Williams if you want. That is still 2 out of 8. Not exactly great odds.

Great safeties can be acquired much lower than the top five in a draft. If Berry is a hands-down rock solid top five, chances are you have a weak upper end of the draft. The game's best safeties historically haven't been top ten choices. They can be acquired much later if a team is smart about it.

That is a good argument and a fair assessment.

However, you can make that same argument for any position. The NFL draft is a glorified crap shoot; any selection, risky or "safe" such as our very own Bobby Carpenter, who was supposed to be a solid contributer for years to come, can turn out to be a dud.

When you have a selection that high, there is plenty to consider, as you hinted to in your post. First there is the 'obvious choose a player that high' or 'trade down for multiple players.' The Cowboys seem content to go with the latter, or getting multiple players that will be solid contributers to the team. These players are safe because if they happen to be duds, you won't have to pay a premium salary for a generic player.

The other option is to choose a player that has a higher chance of being a true game changing elite player, or one that is considered the best at his position in the NFL. The problem with this is that if the player is a dud, the player can set your team back many years. It is a high risk-high reward, all-in gamble.


Another thing to consider is the higher salary for premium draft selections. Normally, this would be a major issue, but if there is not an agreement made with the NFLPA, this year will be uncapped anyway, so salary shouldn't be an issue for one of the worlds richest franchises.

If there ever was a time for the Cowboys to make that gamble, now is the time.

But what position should the focus be on? I am of the crowd that always takes BPA. If that player is a LT that will anchor our O-line for years and keep our QB safe and pave the lanes for our RB's, I'll take it. If that player is a WR with great hands and blazing speed that will cause severe match-up problems and open up our offense, I'll take that too. If the player is a S with great speed that is a true ballhawk and a sure tackler, I'll jump all over it, and that is what Eric Berry is. He could easily be the #1 overall selection.

If he does end up being a Cowboy somehow, he will not disappoint.

 

[Alexander]

That is a good argument and a fair assessment.

However, you can make that same argument for any position. The NFL draft is a glorified crap shoot; any selection, risky or "safe" such as our very own Bobby Carpenter, who was supposed to be a solid contributer for years to come, can turn out to be a dud.

But historically, you can look at linebackers and not find the same strong trend you do at safeties picked in the top five-ten of the draft. That's the general point. It isn't a secret how inexact of a science the draft is at any position. But there are certain truths that shake out. For example, if you want a franchise left tackle, you face better odds getting them early. Same with QBs. You don't see that with safeties for whatever reason and recent history demonstrates that. "Franchise" safeties, like say Polamalu or Reed, can be found later in the first round.

The other option is to choose a player that has a higher chance of being a true game changing elite player, or one that is considered the best at his position in the NFL. The problem with this is that if the player is a dud, the player can set your team back many years. It is a high risk-high reward, all in gamble.

That's the other side of the coin. True game changing elite players aren't often safeties. Defensive ends, skill position players, left tackles are in that realm. Others, like safeties, centers and guards aren't.

It is just the nature of the position. When you secure a Hall of Famer as opposed to simply "one of the best" at the time, that's where the exceptions come into play. With this position it is very rare and certainly not indicative of those players who went in the top five in these drafts.

Now if someone wants to say Berry is a "Hall of Fame" type, so be it. Just be prepared to back it up. I haven't seen it when I have watched Tennessee. He looks like an elite college safety and one who merits a first round choice. But a top five? He'd have to be exceptional for me to take that risk.

Another thing to consider is the higher salary for premium draft selections. Normally, this would be a major issue, but if there is not an agreement made with the NFLPA, this year will be uncapped anyway, so salary shouldn't be an issue for one of the worlds richest franchises.

The way slotting is going you would be hard pressed to get any player to settle for less than what the player at his spot a previous year got. If you try that, you are asking for a holdout.

And choosing players out of financial concerns isn't that smart. If you want the economics to play in your favor, you might be better served to trade down rather than exercise the pick that high, especially where you would be overcompensating the player's position. In general, a safety is rarely among the top paid players on any team. If they are, they've grown into that bracket, not had it given to them the minute they signed a rookie contract.

If there ever was a time for the Cowboys to make that gamble, now is the time.

I have no problem with gambling like that. Just not with a safety.

But what position should the focus be on? I am of the crowd that always takes BPA. If that player is a LT that will anchor our O-line for years and keep our QB safe and pave the lanes for our RB's, I'll take it. If that player is a WR with great hands and blazing speed that will cause severe match-up problems and open up our offense, I'll take that too. If the player is a S with great speed that is a true ballhawk and a sure tackler, I'll jump all over it, and that is what Eric Berry is. He could easily be the #1 overall selection.

If he does end up being a Cowboy somehow, he will not disappoint.

If what you are saying is correct, he's a once-in-a-lifetime safety. I don't see it. Not in the least.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

So he's that good.

Is he going to block? Is he going to stop the run? Is he going to catch the ball? No. He's going to be yet another selection in a secondary that in the last ten years has had no less than five choices dedicated to it in the first two rounds with less than stellar payoff.

Eventually we have to get out of the mode that an all-world safety is the tonic to what we need.

If we ended up with a two firsts and one in the top five, I am taking the best available player. If it is Berry, so be it. All I know is if I have a top five choice, I try my best to parlay it into additional choices.

Safeties are very difficult to evaluate at the college level. And there are too many cases where "the next Ed Reed" simply isn't. And BTW, Ed Reed wasn't a top five choice either. In fact, among safeties in the top ten, here is a list to consider:

2007 - LaRon Landry. Yes, he is really making an impact on the Washington defense, now isn't he? Wait, no he isn't.
2006 - Mike Huff. I really could use him as the posterchild for why "beasts" at safety that people thought were so great can be completely ineffective.
2004 - Sean Taylor. Despite the marytrdom, was he the next Ronnie Lott? No. Very good. But again, not a player that made a defense.
2002 - Roy Williams. For his first two years, yes, an impact player. Since? Not quite.
1991 - Eric Turner. This is the player who never lived up to the hype. I seem to think Berry is getting the same kind of overinflation.
1991 - Stanley Richard. He was Michael Huff before Michael Huff.
1990 - Mark Carrier. Solid player, again, where was the impact.
1988 - Bennie Blades. See above.

We have exactly one in Taylor and even he is highly debateable. Add Williams if you want. That is still 2 out of 8. Not exactly great odds.

Great safeties can be acquired much lower than the top five in a draft. If Berry is a hands-down rock solid top five, chances are you have a weak upper end of the draft. The game's best safeties historically haven't been top ten choices. They can be acquired much later if a team is smart about it.

Berry is the real deal. I don't really know how to prove it. If you've seen him play you just know it. Monte Kiffin said he was the best defensive player he's coached. I think that's enough evidence..

If he was picked #1 overall he would still be a steal.

 

[JonJon]

But historically, you can look at linebackers and not find the same strong trend you do at safeties picked in the top five-ten of the draft. That's the general point. It isn't a secret how inexact of a science the draft is at any position. But there are certain truths that shake out. For example, if you want a franchise left tackle, you face better odds getting them early. Same with QBs. You don't see that with safeties for whatever reason and recent history demonstrates that. "Franchise" safeties, like say Polamalu or Reed, can be found later in the first round.

No argument here for the most part. The only position that I disagree with is the QB position. I personally feel that you do not need to spend a first round in order to find a quality QB. The best thing that a young QB can benefit from is time and a good veteran QB to learn from. How many times have we seen a late round QB sit for a few years and then come in to light it up once his opportunity arrived? And how many times have we seen a first round QB turn into enemy number one and not live up to the hype? You don't have to go too far back to find them; Brady Quinn, Alex Smith, Vince Young, JaMarcus Russell, Matt Leinart, etc.

It could be that most QB's need time to process the dynamics and speed of the NFL and those who are thrown to the wolves too soon aren't strong enough to overcome. It is my opinion that a late round QB that is given time to develop will out-perform a rookie first round any day QB.

That's the other side of the coin. True game changing elite players aren't often safeties. Defensive ends, skill position players, left tackles are in that realm. Others, like safeties, centers and guards aren't.

It is just the nature of the position. When you secure a Hall of Famer as opposed to simply "one of the best" at the time, that's where the exceptions come into play. With this position it is very rare and certainly not indicative of those players who went in the top five in these drafts.

Now if someone wants to say Berry is a "Hall of Fame" type, so be it. Just be prepared to back it up. I haven't seen it when I have watched Tennessee. He looks like an elite college safety and one who merits a first round choice. But a top five? He'd have to be exceptional for me to take that risk.

Again, it's hard to disagree with that. But I don't believe in passing on a player that has the potential to be elite just because it is not customary to draft that position high in the draft, especially when that position is one of need for your team. If you have the player rated high on the draft board and the player is their when it is your turn to pick, you pull the trigger. I think the Cowboys try to get cute too often and pass on some gems that could really help the team. Now, of course the exception would be a kicker. Anybody that would draft a kicker in the first round needs to be exterminated.

The way slotting is going you would be hard pressed to get any player to settle for less than what the player at his spot a previous year got. If you try that, you are asking for a holdout.

And choosing players out of financial concerns isn't that smart. If you want the economics to play in your favor, you might be better served to trade down rather than exercise the pick that high, especially where you would be overcompensating the player's position. In general, a safety is rarely among the top paid players on any team. If they are, they've grown into that bracket, not had it given to them the minute they signed a rookie contract.

I have no problem with gambling like that. Just not with a safety.

If what you are saying is correct, he's a once-in-a-lifetime safety. I don't see it. Not in the least.

I personally think he has the ability to be one. Only time will tell if I am correct.

 

[jchap]

Berry is the real deal. I don't really know how to prove it. If you've seen him play you just know it. Monte Kiffin said he was the best defensive player he's coached. I think that's enough evidence..

If he was picked #1 overall he would still be a steal.

Remember all the "Reggie Bush is the best college football player of all time and a sure fire probowler in the NFL" talk?

Nothing is a sure thing no matter how good a player looks in college

 

[SLATEmosphere]

Remember all the "Reggie Bush is the best college football player of all time and a sure fire probowler in the NFL" talk?

Nothing is a sure thing no matter how good a player looks in college

I along with alot of other people knew Reggie wouldn't translate in the NFL.

Another pat on the back for me thanks.

 

[JonJon]

Remember all the "Reggie Bush is the best college football player of all time and a sure fire probowler in the NFL" talk?

Nothing is a sure thing no matter how good a player looks in college

He is a player that bought into his own hype. Every time he gets the ball, he tries to make the SportsCenter top 10. If he forgets about trying to make a highlight film and play football, he will be better off.

 

[EPL0c0]

The draft is a gamble. Bennett was a gamble, but IMO, with a little work, I think he can be an elite TE that can do great things while maybe prolonging Witten's career a few years as well.

If anything, a guy like Tony Romo knows what it's like to sit back and wait...and wait...and wait. Like Romo, I think when Bennett gets his shot, he's gonna make the most of it.

 

[McCordsville Cowboy]

I'm a UT fan, love Eric Berry, and think he'll be a terrific pro.

But if I'm trading into the top 5, it's not for a safety. It's for a QB, a LT, or a pass rusher.

Good call!

I agree.

 

[Goldenrichards83]

If we were to trade into the top 5 there are a few guys I would get before Berry who I love. Ndamukong Suh(the next Seymour), Gerald Mccoy or Russell Okung. If there off the board I then take Berry.

 

[Cherry]

i thinkin 2 round pick n bobby carpenter

 

[rkell87]

See post #30.

and a dictionary

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

I'm not for taking a safety that high in the draft... I was pissed Dallas took Roy Williams that high in 2002, especially when Ed Reed was picked in the 20's (#24).

 

[Shinywalrus]

No matter what anyone tells you, the draft is an odds game. You absolutely never, ever know if someone will pan out in the NFL. Anyone who tells you that any player is a sure thing is either selling something, bored on the internet, or just a little touched by the mental retardation. If someone on the internet, who has access to youtube highlights and the occasionally aired college game (which, incidentally, RARELY shows DB play), is telling you that they think someone's a sure thing, then, after verifying that the individual is, in fact, NOT technically mentally ********, you should unleash all possible derision and righteous anger. When they then try to argue, "No, no, I have access to coaches tape that shows me how awesome they are," it's probably better to just walk away. It's just not worth having such a silly discussion.

It just so happens that we won the odds game on Bennett.

In a draft that's expected to be deep, why waste a player we know is something and dilute our picks when the quality is high? This is a good DB draft, and not just at safety - maybe if Berry comes out in another year you say, "Yeah, the draft is an odds game, but from the quality of play from this guy relative to his peers, and the generally lower quality of players than other years, the value of having more cards in the game is comparatively less."

That's just not the case here. I honestly think Madden and fantasy football, along with the player-centric, "fixed" skill level type of mentality has made us so much stupider as a generation of football fans.