Ya know what's funny... or not...

[Juke99]

ANYONE who states with ANY degree of certainty, their opinion regarding the effectiveness of this, or any other draft, until a year or two has gone by.

I'm getting a kick out of those who are two very separate camps regarding this draft. It makes for great entertainment...it's what we're here for, to express opinions and have some fun doing so...but let's face it, ya simply can't grade a draft for at least a few years.

 

[NeonNinja]

ANYONE who states with ANY degree of certainty, their opinion regarding the effectiveness of this, or any other draft, until a year or two has gone by.

I'm getting a kick out of those who are two very separate camps regarding this draft. It makes for great entertainment...it's what we're here for, to express opinions and have some fun doing so...but let's face it, ya simply can't grade a draft for at least a few years.

I agree Juke.

 

[Hostile]

When I took English 101 I wrote a story for an assignment. I got a B+ on it.

A semester later I took English 102 and the same story fit an assignment for that class too. So I turned in the exact same story. Just changed the 101 to a 102. I got an A on it.

Grades are often subjective. I admit mine are.

 

[NeonNinja]

When I took English 101 I wrote a story for an assignment. I got a B+ on it.

A semester later I took English 102 and the same story fit an assignment for that class too. So I turned in the exact same story. Just changed the 101 to a 102. I got an A on it.

Grades are often subjective. I admit mine are.

:laugh2:

 

[Boyzmamacita]

It's the "degree of certainty" part that kills me. We all have an opinion, but some posters think their opinion is the gospel. We have found some mid to late round gems in recent drafts. Let's wait and see what this draft brings us.

 

[SLATEmosphere]

When I took English 101 I wrote a story for an assignment. I got a B+ on it.

A semester later I took English 102 and the same story fit an assignment for that class too. So I turned in the exact same story. Just changed the 101 to a 102. I got an A on it.

Grades are often subjective. I admit mine are.

I just did that last semester. Although I got A's on both

 

[DeaconMoss]

One thing is for sure. This bunch is athletic as crap. Maybe thats what Wade needs. Get rid of BP's walls and bring in Wades' ants.

 

[CowboyWay]

I don't think you'll find too many people on here who absolutely know without certainty that this was a great draft, or that it stunk. Most realistic people will admit that you just don't know for at the very least a couple years.

That being said..........damn this draft stunk.

 

[CF74]

3-4 years to be completely fair and even then some guys take 5-6 to really light it up...

 

[THUMPER]

I don't know how good these players will be in the NFL but I am glad that the Cowboys followed my rules for drafting so I have some confidence that the players we selected will turn out to be pretty good for us.

We didn't reach for players, we didn't take any head cases, druggies, thugs, primadonnas, or malcontents. We didn't select any project players, i.e. no former baseball players, no QBs-who-will-play-WR, etc. (I don't consider moving from DE to OLB a "project player").

We took guys who have shown that they are leaders, are players, work hard, play hard, and are teachable.

From those criteria, I consider this a successful draft.

 

[Mansta54]

I don't know how good these players will be in the NFL but I am glad that the Cowboys followed my rules for drafting so I have some confidence that the players we selected will turn out to be pretty good for us.

We didn't reach for players, we didn't take any head cases, druggies, thugs, primadonnas, or malcontents. We didn't select any project players, i.e. no former baseball players, no QBs-who-will-play-WR, etc. (I don't consider moving from DE to OLB a "project player").

We took guys who have shown that they are leaders, are players, work hard, play hard, and are teachable.

From those criteria, I consider this a successful draft.

 

[cowheel]

Bottom line... all these so-called expert analysts don't know that much more than we fans. If they did... they would be getting paid to run some teams scouting department.

They, just like we.... don't come anywhere close to watching and breaking down as much film on every individual player in the draft as these teams scouts do.

On top of that... how do they know better than the coaches who actually designed the systems and call the plays, which players would be better fits?

Listening to Kiper and McShay is pretty entertaining... but at the end of the day... they're guessing like we are. Sometimes they're right - sometimes they're wrong.

All i know is... after the stellar draft we had last year... I'll give this scouting department the benefit of the doubt - at least for a year or three.

 

[Hostile]

I don't know how good these players will be in the NFL but I am glad that the Cowboys followed my rules for drafting so I have some confidence that the players we selected will turn out to be pretty good for us.

We didn't reach for players, we didn't take any head cases, druggies, thugs, primadonnas, or malcontents. We didn't select any project players, i.e. no former baseball players, no QBs-who-will-play-WR, etc. (I don't consider moving from DE to OLB a "project player").

We took guys who have shown that they are leaders, are players, work hard, play hard, and are teachable.

From those criteria, I consider this a successful draft.

Wow.

That may be the best post I have read since before Saturday. I hope you're right.

 

[TheBiG Z]

Yay, someone who gets it.

On the NFLN, I dont know who its was, but he said we had one of the worst drafts because we didnt make a splash. OK??

We drafted "football players" who will work hard, and try to earn a spot. Teams like the Patriots, Colts, and Steelers had a solid/quiet draft and you hear they did great.

 

[dcfanatic]

ANYONE who states with ANY degree of certainty, their opinion regarding the effectiveness of this, or any other draft, until a year or two has gone by.

I'm getting a kick out of those who are two very separate camps regarding this draft. It makes for great entertainment...it's what we're here for, to express opinions and have some fun doing so...but let's face it, ya simply can't grade a draft for at least a few years.

My reservations about the draft have little to do with the name of the players chosen because we can't know who will be that good.

But.

I am not in love with the draft plan.

Thinking that there was no talent in the early rounds that could push for a starting role at FS or LG isn't smart if you ask me.

I guess it's Sensabaugh vs Watkins vs a converted CB in Smith. I guess it's Holland vs Kosier vs a converted rookie RT in Brewster. I guess it's Crayton vs Smith vs ???? at punt returner. I guess it's Stanback vs Hurd vs Johnson vs Wilson for 4th & 5th WR spots. I guess it's Ball vs Mickens for the 4th CB spot. I guess it's a converted DE in Butler vs a converted DE in Brandon Williams vs Ellis (if he's still here) for 3rd OLB/pass rusher. I guess it's Carp vs Brookings vs Jason Williams a 43 OLB moving inside for the Nickel LB.

I think I understand the idea that the special teams needed to be upgraded, but someone forgot to tell me that the offense and the defense were so good that all the starting jobs were safe from us trading up into the draft for some guys to challenge them.

And about the special teams now being upgraded by all these rookies. Didn't we hear more than once from Wade Phillips that a big reason that the special teams were so poor last year was because we were 'playing so many young players'?

And if the talent pool was so bad then doesn't that mean it was just as bad from rounds 1 thru 7?

I think some of this talk from Jerry about moving back for monetary reasons is being lost on some fans because that aspect isn't really what fans talk about. But I think it played a huge part this year.

I don't buy the idea either that Jerry and Stephen wanted to draft 12 players either. They wanted to trade some of those later picks for picks in the 2010 draft to save money and no teams wanted them.

 

[bbgun]

ANYONE who states with ANY degree of certainty, their opinion regarding the effectiveness of this, or any other draft, until a year or two has gone by.

I'm getting a kick out of those who are two very separate camps regarding this draft. It makes for great entertainment...it's what we're here for, to express opinions and have some fun doing so...but let's face it, ya simply can't grade a draft for at least a few years.

Right you are, except it's the critics who are publicly called out and challenged to defend themselves.

 

[Hostile]

Right you are, except it's the critics who are publicly called out and challenged to defend themselves.

Both sides are.

 

[RainMan]

My reservations about the draft have little to do with the name of the players chosen because we can't know who will be that good.

But.

I am not in love with the draft plan.

Thinking that there was no talent in the early rounds that could push for a starting role at FS or LG isn't smart if you ask me.

I guess it's Sensabaugh vs Watkins vs a converted CB in Smith. I guess it's Holland vs Kosier vs a converted rookie RT in Brewster. I guess it's Crayton vs Smith vs ???? at punt returner. I guess it's Stanback vs Hurd vs Johnson vs Wilson for 4th & 5th WR spots. I guess it's Ball vs Mickens for the 4th CB spot. I guess it's a converted DE in Butler vs a converted DE in Brandon Williams vs Ellis (if he's still here) for 3rd OLB/pass rusher. I guess it's Carp vs Brookings vs Jason Williams a 43 OLB moving inside for the Nickel LB.

I think I understand the idea that the special teams needed to be upgraded, but someone forgot to tell me that the offense and the defense were so good that all the starting jobs were safe from us trading up into the draft for some guys to challenge them.

And about the special teams now being upgraded by all these rookies. Didn't we hear more than once from Wade Phillips that a big reason that the special teams were so poor last year was because we were 'playing so many young players'?

And if the talent pool was so bad then doesn't that mean it was just as bad from rounds 1 thru 7?

I think some of this talk from Jerry about moving back for monetary reasons is being lost on some fans because that aspect isn't really what fans talk about. But I think it played a huge part this year.

I don't buy the idea either that Jerry and Stephen wanted to draft 12 players either. They wanted to trade some of those later picks for picks in the 2010 draft to save money and no teams wanted them.

DC, nice counter-post to Juke's original one.

First, I think Juke is spot-on. We all rightly have opinions on the draft, but anyone who takes their opinion too seriously on the matter is a goon. Simple as that.

But, with that said, DC's right. As more is starting to come out about why we selected the players we did, I'm not comfortable with the plan employed in the earlier rounds. Granted, I do love the fact we drafted quality people and avoided the thuggery. But I don't think you draft based on a player's ability to contribute immediately on special teams or for need. The Morning News today suggested one of our earlier picks, Williams I believe, came because of the "need" at ILB over DE. Hopefully it pays off, but I think that's a bad strategy.

Rookies so rarely contribute immediately to a team that it's stupid to draft solely on your immediate needs. Certainly need plays a role, but only as a backdrop to the overall talent available. And it's not like DE is a position of great strength either, mind you.

The value of these draft picks isn't to provide immediate help on special teams. It's that they're competing for starting jobs by 2011 and actually starting -- and doing it effectively -- by 2012.

We'll see if this class can do that.

 

[Hypnotoad]

When I took English 101 I wrote a story for an assignment. I got a B+ on it.

A semester later I took English 102 and the same story fit an assignment for that class too. So I turned in the exact same story. Just changed the 101 to a 102. I got an A on it.

Grades are often subjective. I admit mine are.

1 tyme in englis 11 I send paper to TeaCHER and she say, '' This is very bad, you can't submit this to college, they wont accept you.'' She give me a D-.

I say she so dumb, and sent to college anyway. Look me now. Stupid teacher.