What receiver should they sign?

speedkilz88 said:
You shouldn't line up to pay a guy 32 years old with 700-800 yards the past 3 seasons for $12 million.

710
737
812
Click to expand...
Exactly and I do not believe the Boys will. Tolbert had close to those numbers (610) last year in his third year for a lot less cash. Think they will look to the draft for a WR2.
 
Sandyf said:
What about trading for a WR? Not sure any of the guys left in FA are really going to help. And since Jerry likes reclamation projects then why not trade J. Tolbert WR to Tennessee for T. Burke WR straight up. Burke still has upside and good size while it appears that Tolbert is about the same. Cost is minimal as Dallas would end up only being about 1 mil difference on cap. Might be worth the shot, you know, a former #1 for a former 2nd round pick.
Click to expand...
I'd rather have Tolbert.
 
thunderpimp91 said:
Brandin Cooks is not on the same level of these other guys mentioned....Maybe Lockett, he seems to be in legitimate regression.


Hes still a FA https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2025-nfl-free-agency-tracker-signings-trades-cuts


This just shows that you have zero idea what you're talking about. First off if Burks is a similar player to Tolbert we are in a world of trouble. I call out Tolbert all the time but even I am not that down on the guy. Despite that though Kupp had 73 catches for 800 yards last year. There is no Samuels that plays WR, but I'm assuming you meant Deebo Samuel? He had 51 catches for 670 yards. Tolbert had 49 catches for 610 yards.

The big difference? Other than the fact that Tolbert was the worst statistically here of the three....

Tolbert ran 553 routes this season. Kupp just 426, Samuel at 420.

Tolbert did less with more and exactly why you can't just go off of basic counting stats in the NFL. Tolbert did improve this last season but he still put up WR3 numbers despite getting WR1 snaps. These other guys outperformed him while missing multiple games with injury.
Click to expand...
What week was Tolbert WR1? I'm pretty sure Cooks was back for .the last two game Lamb missed. By my count the only games Tolbert was WR2 was the 8 games Cooks missed and those were with a backup QB not Stafford and Purdy. WR3 routes aren't the same as WR2 Routes.
 
Last edited:
morasp said:
Kupp had 710 yards on 67 receptions in 12 regular season games and was missing for 5 games.

Tolbert was only WR2 for the 7 games cooks missed and those were with a backup QB, the rest were WR3. WR3 looks in our offense don't really get much of a look. Kupp had Stafford and Samuel had Purdy.
Click to expand...
You're right on Kupp, didnt realize I was adding his in playoff numbers as well. Still then we need to take away his snaps from those playoff games as well.

Kupp averaged 1.99 yards per route he ran last year
Tolbert was at 1.10 Y/RR

We can use the backup QB argument but we still had Lamb at 2.27 which is over his career average. We also had Turpin at 2.11. The issue is still there that Tolbert put up numbers you would expect out of your 3rd WR while getting the 19th most routes ran in football. His numbers this year are largely from a high volume of snaps, not necessarily quality play this season.

At some point we have to admit that we don't have very good football players somewhere on this roster. We cant keep having the round about "Dak was bad in 2024." "Yeah but we didnt have a great receiving unit." "Wrs were bad this year" "Yeah but look at the QB situation." We do this all the time with nearly every position....LBs arent bad, its the DT play. RBs arent bad its the OL....OL is blocking but do go cheap on RBs.
 
morasp said:
What week was Tolbert WR1? I'm pretty sure Cooks was back for .the last two game Lamb missed. By my count the only games Tolbert was WR2 was the 7 games Cooks missed and those were with a backup QB.
Click to expand...
Not saying he was WR1, but he got the number of snaps you would expect to see out of a teams #1WR. He ran the 19th most routes in all of football last year.
 
thunderpimp91 said:
You're right on Kupp, didnt realize I was adding his in playoff numbers as well. Still then we need to take away his snaps from those playoff games as well.

Kupp averaged 1.99 yards per route he ran last year
Tolbert was at 1.10 Y/RR

We can use the backup QB argument but we still had Lamb at 2.27 which is over his career average. We also had Turpin at 2.11. The issue is still there that Tolbert put up numbers you would expect out of your 3rd WR while getting the 19th most routes ran in football. His numbers this year are largely from a high volume of snaps, not necessarily quality play this season.

At some point we have to admit that we don't have very good football players somewhere on this roster. We cant keep having the round about "Dak was bad in 2024." "Yeah but we didnt have a great receiving unit." "Wrs were bad this year" "Yeah but look at the QB situation." We do this all the time with nearly every position....LBs arent bad, its the DT play. RBs arent bad its the OL....OL is blocking but do go cheap on RBs.
Click to expand...
Lamb is always the first read some time to a fault. WR3 routes aren't the same as WR2 especially in our offense most of the time they were decoy routes or rubs. He would need to see a full season at WR2 with the starting QB before you could really say he isn't any good. Turpin actually had a better year than I realized.
 
Last edited:
morasp said:
Lamb is always the first read some time to a fault. WR3 routes aren't the same as WR2 especially in our offense most of the time they were decoy routes or rubs. He would need to see a full season at WR2 with the starting QB before you could really say he isn't any good.
Click to expand...
This just isnt true and honestly why I hate the WR1/2/3 tags. WR1 isnt a position on the field. If you want to look at how many times guys are lining up as the slot vs the X or Z then we can have an actual football conversation, but WR1 is typically just saying a teams best receiver. Also Lamb is not the 1st read nearly as often as you think. These elite route runners are frequently later reads allowing plays to develop for bigger chunk gains. You show me an offense that always targets the same WR as the 1st read and Ill show you a really bad offense with that exact same tape. Lamb also lines up all over the field at every WR position which gives other WRs the opportunity to move around and play multiple positions as well which Tolbert has done.....without the extra attention a defense gives to a CeeDee Lamb.

This idea that Tolbert is always a later read so he wont get the opportunities is simply false. WRs get balls thrown their way 90% of the time because they are open. Fans significantly overestimate how many decoy routes get ran just to open up a play for Lamb. These plays get highlighted a lot because when they work they can go for big gains, but this is a small portion of NFL snaps. Typically teams do not want to limit their passing options with decoys. Tolbert doesnt get more balls thrown his way because he runs a very limited route tree well. He runs pretty well vertically and can play off that with comeback routes at a very high success rate. I see some success with in breaking routes against Zone where he can find holes in zone coverage pretty naturally. After that he really starts to fall off though. Everyone in the NFL is good at something or they wouldnt make it to the highest level. The key to being more than a roll player is being able to do multiple things really well, and that is where Tolbert needs to take another step forward to have much of a chance. Its all over the numbers and the tape backs it up pretty well. This is not a guy who has shown to be a reliable #2 at this stage in his career. If he can step up and take another step forward thats great, but its not a gamble the Cowboys should take.
 
thunderpimp91 said:
This just isnt true and honestly why I hate the WR1/2/3 tags. WR1 isnt a position on the field. If you want to look at how many times guys are lining up as the slot vs the X or Z then we can have an actual football conversation, but WR1 is typically just saying a teams best receiver. Also Lamb is not the 1st read nearly as often as you think. These elite route runners are frequently later reads allowing plays to develop for bigger chunk gains. You show me an offense that always targets the same WR as the 1st read and Ill show you a really bad offense with that exact same tape. Lamb also lines up all over the field at every WR position which gives other WRs the opportunity to move around and play multiple positions as well which Tolbert has done.....without the extra attention a defense gives to a CeeDee Lamb.

This idea that Tolbert is always a later read so he wont get the opportunities is simply false. WRs get balls thrown their way 90% of the time because they are open. Fans significantly overestimate how many decoy routes get ran just to open up a play for Lamb. These plays get highlighted a lot because when they work they can go for big gains, but this is a small portion of NFL snaps. Typically teams do not want to limit their passing options with decoys. Tolbert doesnt get more balls thrown his way because he runs a very limited route tree well. He runs pretty well vertically and can play off that with comeback routes at a very high success rate. I see some success with in breaking routes against Zone where he can find holes in zone coverage pretty naturally. After that he really starts to fall off though. Everyone in the NFL is good at something or they wouldnt make it to the highest level. The key to being more than a roll player is being able to do multiple things really well, and that is where Tolbert needs to take another step forward to have much of a chance. Its all over the numbers and the tape backs it up pretty well. This is not a guy who has shown to be a reliable #2 at this stage in his career. If he can step up and take another step forward thats great, but its not a gamble the Cowboys should take.
Click to expand...
It's a nice explanation in general. But empirically Is there a statistic for how many times Lamb is our first read or how many times Tolbert was open but not thrown to? Tolbert was a good WR2 just last season going against pretty tough defenses like the Eagles, Lions, 49ers, Texans, and Steelers. For example comparing common opponents Kupp was missing in the first game against the 49ers but had 0 catches in the second. Tolbert had 3 receptions for 44 yards. Against the Lions Deebo had 1 reception for five yards. Tolbert had 4 receptions for 43 yards. For the record I do believe we need another blue chip player at WR and would love one of the top 10 in the draft but I'm not sure that what's available in FA would really help us that much.
 
morasp said:
It's a nice explanation in general. But empirically Is there a statistic for how many times Lamb is our first read or how many times Tolbert was open but not thrown to? Tolbert was a good WR2 just last season going against pretty tough defenses like the Eagles, Lions, 49ers, Texans, and Steelers. For example comparing common opponents Kupp was missing in the first game against the 49ers but had 0 catches in the second. Tolbert had 3 receptions for 44 yards. Against the Lions Deebo had 1 reception for five yards. Tolbert had 4 receptions for 43 yards. For the record I do believe we need another blue chip player at WR and would love one of the top 10 in the draft but I'm not sure that what's available in FA would really help us that much.
Click to expand...
Agree with you on the last part, I'd love to get a WR at 12 or a slight trade down to compete for that WR2 spot with Tolbert. I honestly dont hate the guy I just dont think you hand him a starting position based on last years numbers. If he can take a step forward and earn the position thats great and you can still find spots for your 1st round WR to get on the field. Then if your 1st round WR wins the spot I think Tolbert has more than shown that he is capable of being that rotational guy.....Mixed with Turpin and a couple developmental guys in Mingo/Flournoy. I just think that adding one more legitimate WR is the difference in the position being an area of strength vs just sort of average for this team.
 
I actually wanted Hollins before he went to NE.

I'd take Cooper over Krupp (pardon the pun). Diggs a non-starter, in every sense.
 
Pass2Run said:
Meh.

Honestly, I like our guys. Go after defensive FAs and draft a top, young WR.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't think we need to do anything at WR this year. We have more pressing needs like (as you said) shoring up our D. This has been said many times (I know I've mentioned it many times LOL) the Eagles D is who controlled the Superbowl. Defense can make or break how the season turns out... Also, I am of the belief that our O line needs major help. To (both) protect DAK and to create holes for our RB. I think those needs outweigh a wide receiver. Just my thoughts...
 
Kupp will be good , but too rich for Stephen, Lockett if healthy is good option but he wont be also as cheap for Stephen , what we need is vertical route running physical WR who will not be beaten in LOS .
 
big dog cowboy said:
No reason to overpay for a WR like Kupp when that won't have a major effect on the team winning or losing. Zero chance the Cowboys go after Cooper. Diggs injury history is concerning. If you want a vet just get Lockett. Should be a reasonable contract.
Click to expand...
Kupp would surprise you if they were able to get him. They have the money to do this. It will be interesting. They really need a solid number 2 receiver.
 
nalam said:
Kupp will be good , but too rich for Stephen, Lockett if healthy is good option but he wont be also as cheap for Stephen , what we need is vertical route running physical WR who will not be beaten in LOS .
Click to expand...
With the money they have, I don't think Kupp is too rich for them.
 
They’re not about to overpay Kupp whose numbers have dropped each of the last three seasons and has been injury prone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 184 more.
Total: 5,382 (members: 284, guests: 5,098)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,234
Messages
13,798,813
Members
23,775
Latest member
KingMe21457
Back
Top