Why do so many see McQuistan & Austin as chump change?

[sago1]

I believe both McQuistan & Austin can really contribute to this team & won't dismiss them as chump change like some on this board have done. Nor when I read a statement in Flozel Adams' replacement posting that McQuistan as a 7th rounder hasn't shown anything. Since others posted that Austin as an undrafted player probably won't be much either so I decided to include him in my disclaimer.

Now I'm not going to bet my mortgage on either but not going to dismiss them either. Parcells has a good eye for talent and many of the players he drafted, undrafted rookies we signed and yes even FAs have made big contributions to this team. Yes some have failed but no team has a 100% successful rate so get a life. Anyway, part of the dismissal of both players seem to follow the line that since Parcells liked them they probably won't do much, etc. So, before we discuss McQuistan & Austin, let's step back and take a look at a few other players he selected when the odds against them.

Now let me see. Are we or aren't we committed to an undrafted QB who Parcells signed in his first season (2003), allowed him to develop & then started him in 06 when Parcells jerked Bledsoe. Romo absolutely amazed everyone in his first 5 games & was the talk of the NFL, etc. Performance certainly dropped off in last 5 games but he still ended up highly rated at around 95% in QB rankings. What were his odds?

We also desperately in need of an OT in 05 and instead Parcells signed an OT late in November who he know couldn't help us that year but hoped this player could rehab enough to help in 06. Instead, Colombo won the starting RT job where he played all 17 games & who most on this board were thrilled to have re-signed. What were those odds?

I could go on but want to discuss McQuistan and Austin.

Did any posters to the Flozel Adams Replacement site listen to Parcells PC last summer when he discussed McQuistan? If not, he was laughing when he said he received calls from other teams asking about their getting McQuistan. Parcells made it clear McQuistan wasn't going anywhere; that's when we knew McQuistan made the team. In another PC Parcells said McQuistan would be the next starting LT for the Cowboys but he 1 year behind his twin brother who drafted in 3rd round & started whole season for the Raiders; remember our McQuistan played 2 less years of football then his twin brother. McQuistan was not activated last year but we do know he has all the intangibles for a LT including fact he a very hard worker with a nasty disposition on the playing field. BTW: Yes, I still want us to draft an OT who can challenge McQuistan but also doing so gives us flexible on whether to re-sign Adams. I'd like Doug Free if we can get him in the 3rd round or Barbre in 3-4.

Now re Austin. Cowboys signed 2+ undrafted free agents in 06 but two of them (Austin/Hurd) realy stood out. We only saw Austin in first preseason game cause it later came out Parcells trying hide him so he could waive him & re-sign to our PS. But that didn't work out cause Cowboys learned thru their contacts that other teams had seen enough of him in just 1 game that he would be grabbed off the waiver wire; same went for Sam Hurd. So Parcells forced keep both Austin & Hurd on the team (along with McQuistan, Hoyte and Elam) knowing all needed development. Austin saw virtually no playing time at WR cause how could Parcells justify sitting either TO or Terry Glenn much. Anyway, while neither Hurd nor Austin had ever played ST before & knowing Parcells demanded his backups play ST, Hurd became one of our better ST & Austin stepped in for Thompson when he went down to become a good PR--frankly better then Thompson cause Austin has good speed and can evade tacklers, etc. BTW: I would still go along with signing a WR like Meacham or Bowe but none of the others. I just don't like Jarrett's lack of speed, etc. If we must draft a WR, I want a player who clearly shows he can become our #1 WR cause Cowboys have already ticketed Austin with his size/speed/hands to replace Terry Glenn.

I'm sure I left out some other points I wanted to make but this is long enough. My only regret is that Austin didn't get more playing time at WR. If Payton had been our OC he would have sure tried get him some opportunities. Frankly I wonder what kind of opportunities any WR we draft this year will get in regular season.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

You make very good points. Good post.

I know Carpenter was a high pick but people wanted to call him a bust just because he wasnt playing.... its the nature of the "know it all" beast.... LOL

Some people dont realize that the NFL is made up of mostly mid to lower round picks and undrafted players. High draft pick doesnt equate to guaranteed anything.

 

[Hostile]

I don't remember anyone classifying them as "chump change." I've heard people say there isn't enough evidence yet. Is it possible you take umbrage with any lack of perceived faith no matter how realistic the logic behind it might be?

 

[sacase]

I don't get all of this faith in players who have never played a whole lot. WHile I understand you have to start somewhere, I am not sure that any of these guys are more than a role player. Parcells kept a lot of players around because he felt he needed to build depth while still having your stars. I think both Hurd and Austin will both be role players in the future, I hnestly have no idea what to think about McQuistern, I mean honestly what has he shown? I really don't understand why people think he will replace Flo. This is Flo's last year on his contract, you best belive he is going to bring his A game if he wants to get paid again.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

Some people have this notion that if a player is not drafted HIGH, then they can only be a back up or in a WR case, a #3 or #4. They have this thought because, if they were good enough to be a #1, then someone would have drafted them high.

I personally think this line of thought is just plain stupid. I think Austin and Hurd can become very good if not GREAT WR for this team. They are just raw, they need to develop. It is on their shoulders, if they put in the time and effort, they will be very successful. Austin is very fast and from what I have seen, has pretty good hands. Once he develops a feel for the game, when to sit in coverage, when to break off a route, how to see the blitz and go to Hot route,, etc.. he will be very dangerous. Hurd to me is the better of the two WR. He just seems to have the knack to find the open spot and catches everything.

I think both of these guys will be on this team for a long time. I do not feel the need to press in this years Draft to get a WR, esp early. I would not be against drafting a WR in the 3rd or 4th rounds. I think we have some very good talents in Crayton, Hurd and Austin.

 

[Sandyf]

I will not be surprised if McQuistan actually ends up starting this year. Parcells had a good idea for OL and undercovered some good ones.

As to Flo playing for a contract, he really never has. He has always been in the situation of a team needing him (us) or the market in dire need of LTs (the rest of the teams). Yes, I am hopefully that Flo plays well this year but realistically I expect the norm from him. He gets lazy during games, he will end up allowing around 10 to 12 sacks of the QB through the season. He has never been a "nasty" player on the field and does not tend to finish blocks when the play is away from him.

He is a good LT but he will never be compared to a Tunei at LT in Dallas or even Eric Wright at RT. Larry Allen is a HOF LG/RG and a much better LT than Adams.

Posters on this board and others mostly dismiss any player that isn't drafted which is pure nonsense. Just look at Dallas' history, we have always had guys that were undrafted and were much better players than those drafted. I shouldn't need to point them out for pure Dallas fans.

Now will McQuistan or Austin make it as starters and even possible All-Pros, well there is nothing to say they won't. In fact, I would bet they both stand a good chance of being open day starters in 2008 something like another guy that if the mods had the old posts from a couple of years ago are similiar to a guy that will be the opening day starter in 2007, might know him, Tony Romo.

He was much maligned before last season and especially the year before as how can an undrafted guy ever be any good starting for the Boys at QB. Guess we could have kept Quincy or Ryan, they were both drafted weren't they.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

23% of the players on rosters today are undrafted FA's. To think these guys (and low draft picks) can't contribute is asinine ESPECIALLY after they've made it to season #2.

 

[sago1]

Maybe I did take a little umbrage Hostile but I've seen several postings which just dismiss both mainly cause they clearly state/give no value to Parcells assessment of both. I wanted to make sure posters understood it wasn't just Parcells view of both but was shared by some other teams who hoped to trade/cut some of our players.

Parcells turned this team around and while we didn't go as far as most of us hoped, he added a lot of good players and we in good position to become legit SB contenders if we add a few more players who can replace some of our older guys and if Romo steps up again. Frankly, I think Parcells demeanor by time December rolled around (have heard stories about the doom and gloom and people walking on glass) to think this team simply worn out both emotionally and physically to get the job done. I only mention this now cause nothing of what happened in December should be used denigrate Parcells ability pick talent (Jacobs/Peterman aside). While this para might seem far afield from discussion re McQuistan & Austin, I'm hoping show he has an eye for talent so ignore his view at our peril.

BTW: I've read two different articles in last 1-2 months stating that Austin looked good in limited playing time last year. It was limited cause I barely recall seeing him myself in anything but PR role. Unfortunately I didn't post info on this board and can't recall where I read. From now on will post anything re Cowboy players that I see.

I got a lot of time on my hands cause I'm retired and love read info about the Cowboys. Sometimes I even check out other team websites, fan forums est. Like I read in Pats newspaper last summer that they pretty satisfied with their team but would be interested in signing either Elam or Hoyte (can't remember which at this point) & hoped we'd have to cut the player they wanted. Should have posted on this board but just didn't.

Point is that I'm retired and got lots of time on my hands and always looking for anything re Cowboys. In future will post here in hope those readers get better feel about how other teams/players/writers view our team or certain players on it.

 

[jay cee]

I don't remember anyone classifying them as "chump change." I've heard people say there isn't enough evidence yet. Is it possible you take umbrage with any lack of perceived faith no matter how realistic the logic behind it might be?

Thank you. It's not knocking those guys to suggest that a WR or LT should be taken early in the draft if possible.

I know they have potential, but what if it takes them 3-4 years to reach that potential?

There is nothing wrong with having other options.

 

[theebs]

23% of the players on rosters today are undrafted FA's. To think these guys (and low draft picks) can't contribute is asinine ESPECIALLY after they've made it to season #2.

Their is your 32 bucks at work. Some of that stuff was very interesting in the guide.

 

[theogt]

So you're not betting your mortgage on them and you wouldn't mind drafting a Barbre in the 3-4? Gotcha. I'm glad we clarified your position from the position of posters in the "Flozell Replacement" thread.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

23% of the players on rosters today are undrafted FA's. To think these guys (and low draft picks) can't contribute is asinine ESPECIALLY after they've made it to season #2.

More... more.... more stats

 

[Doomsday101]

McQuistan is still developing as a player and it is impossiable to know if he will ever crack the starting lineup at this stage or not. Hopefully he can but it is a complete unknown at this stage. Austin on the other hand at least is able to contribute at this point on the return teams and this should help buy him time to develop into a WR and hopefully a starter. I would not count either one out but I do consider McQuistan more of a longshot than Austin.

 

[Hostile]

Maybe I did take a little umbrage Hostile but I've seen several postings which just dismiss both mainly cause they clearly state/give no value to Parcells assessment of both. I wanted to make sure posters understood it wasn't just Parcells view of both but was shared by some other teams who hoped to trade/cut some of our players.

Parcells turned this team around and while we didn't go as far as most of us hoped, he added a lot of good players and we in good position to become legit SB contenders if we add a few more players who can replace some of our older guys and if Romo steps up again. Frankly, I think Parcells demeanor by time December rolled around (have heard stories about the doom and gloom and people walking on glass) to think this team simply worn out both emotionally and physically to get the job done. I only mention this now cause nothing of what happened in December should be used denigrate Parcells ability pick talent (Jacobs/Peterman aside). While this para might seem far afield from discussion re McQuistan & Austin, I'm hoping show he has an eye for talent so ignore his view at our peril.

BTW: I've read two different articles in last 1-2 months stating that Austin looked good in limited playing time last year. It was limited cause I barely recall seeing him myself in anything but PR role. Unfortunately I didn't post info on this board and can't recall where I read. From now on will post anything re Cowboy players that I see.

I got a lot of time on my hands cause I'm retired and love read info about the Cowboys. Sometimes I even check out other team websites, fan forums est. Like I read in Pats newspaper last summer that they pretty satisfied with their team but would be interested in signing either Elam or Hoyte (can't remember which at this point) & hoped we'd have to cut the player they wanted. Should have posted on this board but just didn't.

Point is that I'm retired and got lots of time on my hands and always looking for anything re Cowboys. In future will post here in hope those readers get better feel about how other teams/players/writers view our team or certain players on it.

The Pats wanted Hoyte. I didn't read the article you mention, but I did talk to someone from their organization who told me so. They loved the film of him at NC State.

I just have never understood why people are not allowed to have some doubts. We've seen McQuistan in Pre-season. Big flipping deal. Colston Weatherington looked good in pre-season. I must have missed where he is tearing up the NFL. McQuistan was active for exactly 1 game, and did not step onto the football field.

I like Austin, a lot in fact. However, I don't see him as a #1 or #2 WR in the NFL. Why not? Well, maybe it's because he is much the same as Randall Williams who was big and fast as well. Oh, did I mention that he (RW) never caught a pass in Dallas? Austin shares that distinction too. He played in 9 games, mostly because Tyson Thompson was lost for the year and we needed him as a Kick Returner, and did not catch a pass. KR success does not equal success as a WR. (See Desmond Howard and Dante Hall for reference.)

Please, tell me how 9 games, no receptions translates into "could be a #1 or #2 WR in the NFL."

It's cool to put a lot of faith in our players. I just don't see where it is wrong to keep realism in the equation too. And like I said, I don't remember anyone thinking of them as "chump change" as your thread title suggests. In fact, if anything you're putting the idea into people's heads by suggesting it.

 

[Hostile]

23% of the players on rosters today are undrafted FA's. To think these guys (and low draft picks) can't contribute is asinine ESPECIALLY after they've made it to season #2.

Ever looked at the stats of where players are drafted that end up in the Hall of Fame?

I'll never understand the extreme loyalty to a player that would cause anyone to think we shouldn't find someone better if the chance is there. I just don't get that.

 

[theebs]

Didnt mcquistan get in one of the games when adams got dinged? I think it was the first washington game..Cant remember, I thought he played a little though. Nothing to base anything off of, just saying. I thought flo got dinged and he played a couple of series.

 

[InmanRoshi]

I'm not writing them off. What McQuinstan, Miles and Hurd did in training camp, preseason games and regular season practices against NFL players carries more weight with me than what some rookie did against Louisiana Tech or Vanderbuilt last year. I like Proctor a lot too.

That's why I think its imperative that you don't focus on a particular position in the draft. What your think you "needs" are in April of this year and what they actually turn out to be a year or two down the road when these drafted players are actually ready to contribute are hardly ever the same.

 

[theebs]

23% of the players on rosters today are undrafted FA's. To think these guys (and low draft picks) can't contribute is asinine ESPECIALLY after they've made it to season #2.

One more thing out of that guide that has me really excited is, justin blaylock was compared to and reminded the ourlad scouts of will shields and called him a 10 year nfl guard.

Made me really want blaylock even more. It sucks that it is too high to take him at 22, and he will be gone when we pick in the 2nd round.

So to me I say move back with anyone you can and take him. Of course he maybe higher rated on real nfl boards. I would just hate to miss out on another shawn andrews. Stupid eagles trading up.

 

[theebs]

I'm not writing them off. What McQuinstan, Miles and Hurd did in training camp, preseason games and regular season practices against NFL players carries more weight with me than what some rookie did against Louisiana Tech or Vanderbuilt last year. I like Proctor a lot too.

That's why I think its imperative that you don't focus on a particular position in the draft. What your think you "needs" are in April of this year and what they actually turn out to be a year or two down the road when these drafted players are actually ready to contribute are hardly ever the same.

I feel very similarly. Hurd learned all 3 spots and made himself useful to the team. He played a pretty good amount, and there were many formations where he spelled crayton, glenn or owens. He did mix some routes up and run in the wrong areas, but that happens to young players.

It seems listening to parcells, sham, laufenberg and waters at the end of last year that inside the organization procter was thought of very highly.

I do love blaylock though and I am still ticked that we missed out on andrews.

 

[jay cee]

Ever looked at the stats of where players are drafted that end up in the Hall of Fame?

I'll never understand the extreme loyalty to a player that would cause anyone to think we shouldn't find someone better if the chance is there. I just don't get that.

What's funny is that they will call for guys like Bradie James and Roy Williams to be replaced because they feel they have not done a good enough job.

But some guy who has not even been seen has the potential to be a star, so there is no need to even draft a player that plays his position.