A wild NFL Wild Card weekend is behind us, and if we learned one thing (besides final confirmation that the NFC East was awful this year) it’s that normally the team with a better quarterback wins big games in this league.
On Saturday, we saw Alex Smith beat a completely dysfunctional Brian Hoyer, and Ben Roethlisberger lead a game winning drive for the Steelers against AJ McCarron’s Bengals.
Yesterday, we saw Russel Wilson’s team come out on top against that of Teddy Bridgewater, as well as Aaron Rodgers’ and the Packers defeating Kirk Cousins’ Redskins.
Obviously, a lot more could be said about these games when determining how it was won or lost, but starting with the quarterbacks is as good of a place as ever.
While the Dallas Cowboys will be playing with one of the league’s top signal callers in 2016, Tony Romo, his health is a concern as well as longevity. The result of 12 full games without Romo this season led to a 4-12 Cowboys record, and I hope I speak for the vast majority of Cowboys Nation when saying that I expect more than four wins from this team for year’s to come.
The potential is certainly there, as well as the high draft pick. Perhaps the best result from this miserable season is Dallas securing the fourth overall pick in this year’s NFL Draft. However, there is a strong case to be made that the Cowboys should use this pick on a player that will not make an immediate impact.
Selecting in the top five is a rarity that everyone but the Browns should dislike, but take full advantage of. For the Cowboys, taking advantage of this pick may mean drafting a Jarred Goff of California, Paxton Lynch of Memphis or even Carson Wentz of North Dakota State.
Should the Cowboys draft one of these young quarterbacks, they will be given the rare opportunity to sit and learn behind Tony Romo for a few years before being given full control of a team that will certainly get plenty of attention upon throwing a rookie into the starting QB role.
My hope at the moment is that this luxury and opportunity is too good of a chance for Will McClay and Dallas to pass on, and the QB of the future is brought in with the fourth overall pick in the draft. I firmly believe that this team is talented enough across the board to contend for a Super Bowl without a first-round talent at another position.
Of course, with such an attractive pick, grabbing a top wideout like Laquon Treadwell or impact defensive back like Jalen Ramsey also seems appetizing – and I myself have gone back of forth mainly between those two players and Jarred Goff for weeks now.
For the Cowboys, the positions that need to be addressed the most on offense are running back and wide receiver. With a deep class for both positions, the Cowboys can get a receiver to play across from Dez and rookie back to pair with McFadden later in the draft.
Defensively, this team put together a very solid performance all season long – which will go under the radar thanks to the play of the offense. While they have some key free agents to deal with, I still expect this unit as a whole to stand up in 2016 – while also benefiting from a few new potential rookies selected in the second or third rounds.
Call me bold, but I don’t just have my eyes set on the 2016 Super Bowl trophy – I have my eyes set on the Cowboys building another dynasty. The last quarterback the team selected in the first round was certainly a part of one, when Troy Aikman was brought into Dallas with the first overall pick in 1989.
Now at fourth overall, it’s time for the Cowboys to find their next Super Bowl winning quarterback. So you tell me, with the fourth overall pick of the 2016 NFL Draft, the Dallas Cowboys select ___________.
Fill in the blank by leaving me a comment below, or respond on Twitter @ShoreSportsNJ!
Our last Superbowl quarterback Troy came out of the state CA so it maybe a tale tale to draft Jarred out of CA.
Here's the rub, for me: You've got three guys who you could take at #4 overall and they look like this:
Guys… these are prototypical NFL pocket-passing quarterbacks, all three of them. I keep seeing people say this is not a great quarterback class on the top end and that may very well be true, but the Cowboys also don't need an immediate impact player at this position, right? They need a guy they can groom for a couple seasons. They need someone who can be a student of the game for a while, but who also has a LOT of potential.
If I thought any of these three guys would be available in the 2nd round, I would say let's just wait and take whichever one is available then, but so far it's not sounding like that will be possible. None of these guys are as NFL-ready as Andrew Luck was, but it seems like teams picking later in the first round would be ecstatic to have one of them if they can. Even teams still in the playoffs like Pittsburgh, Arizona, or Kansas City would probably love for one of these guys to fall to them in the 1st.
I think the Cowboys have to really consider it. You don't get to pick #4 overall very often and have your pick of almost anyone in the entire draft. The quarterback position is the most important position on the field, after all.
And Carson Wentz has red hair. I'm just saying…. the Red Baron likes quarterbacks with red hair.
I just hate the idea of ending up with a QB who'd be a mid-late first round talent in a normal year and not getting a superstar DE, DB, or some other position at #4. I know QB is important but we've got at least another year or two of Romo. Going all in on a rookie QB this year feels a little reactionary to me.
So many first round QB bust out there. Then you add a poor qb draft class, I say we pick best player available or move down and gather picks.
I think you just don't have the post-Aikman era fresh in your mind, Jess. We got cute back then, too, and let our quickly-regressing quarterback keep playing with no contingency plan in place. Aikman retired and then we drafted Quincy Carter in the 2nd round and we all know how that turned out.
My philosophy on quarterbacks in the top 10 is that they fail so regularly because teams wait until they NEED to have one. They get drafted and then are expected to be the face of a franchise from the very start. I think most 21-year olds just aren't well-prepared for something like that. Sometimes they claw their way through it (Cam Newton, Andrew Luck) and other times they crumble under the pressure.
To me, we have an amazing and unique opportunity to take a top-flight rookie quarterback with prototypical size, arm strength, and a great college pedigree and groom him for the NFL game. I just don't think we should pass that up because we're afraid of him being a bust. Pass rushers, linebackers, cornerbacks are also regular top 10 busts and we have first-hand experience with that.
With all that said, I wouldn't be heartbroken if we DIDNT draft a quarterback. At #4, you're going to get someone worth being excited about regardless. If that's Jalen Ramsey or Myles Jack or somebody like that, then so be it.
I understand that having a top 5 pick is a rarity. Normally it means you need a STARTING quarterback. One that you draft in the 1st round because he should have NFL ready qualities with expectations to start week 1 because a starting caliber quarterback doesn't currently exist on your team. Thats not our case. In the eyes of many, and more importantly the Cowbous brass, Romo is expected to be the starter for the next 3-4 seasons. Which affords us the option of drafting a quarterback with great unique qualities, but isn't quite ready to start yet. A project qb that they feel they can groom into a starting caliber qb in 2-3 seasons. And that type of qb can be found in rounds 2-5. Jerry doesn't wanna invest in a top 5 pick, or the money that goes with it on a player that will sit on the bench for 2-3 seasons when he can draft an impact starter (Bosa, Ramsey, Buckner) instead. We have the luxury of time to groom our qb, lets exercise that luxury. Besides, you don't want to draft a qb just because we have a top 5 pick. There isn't one worthy of such a high pick this season. The only teams interested in Goff, Lynch, or Wntz are DESPERATE for a starter because they don't feel that they currently have one on their roster. Lets get Bosa in the 1st, Elliot or Henry in the 2nd, then a project qb in the 3-5.
Here's where I struggle when I see comments about this being a poor QB draft class:
http://www.drafttek.com/Top-100-NFL-Draft-Prospects-2016.asp
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2016/all
There is still the Senior Bowl, combine, pro days, etc but the people actually ranking draft prospects are saying these quarterbacks actually do belong in the top 10.
The only thing I would caution when you're seeing people say these quarterbacks aren't worthy is that I think they're referring to "NFL-ready" quarterbacks. To me, that's only relevant if you need them to start right away.
I get what you're saying but a reach is still a reach. You can't let the market dictate terms. That's how you end up paying Brandon Carr like he's Patrick Peterson or spending too many years with Blake Bortles or Jake Locker. I think a Top 5 pick demands that you take someone who you believe can be the best player in the NFL at their position and none of this year's QBs inspire me that way.
Now, if you want to take someone in the 2nd for some grooming… by all means!
I just really hate the idea of building the foundation of your next decade of football on the 4th or 5th best quarterback in his draft class. Doesn't that seem silly to you? You've got the most important position in all of football, and you have a 36 year old quarterback who spent almost the entire previous season injured with two separate injuries. Why would we let the top three quarterbacks in this class get drafted before we picked our guy?
http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/superbowl_quarterbacks/
That's a list of Super Bowl quarterbacks by their drafted round. I dropped this into an excel spreadsheet and here's what you find out:
1st round: 50 times
2nd round: 7 times
3rd round: 11 times
4th round: 4 times
History tells us that if you're serious about finding a quarterback to take your team to the Super Bowl, you need one of those top guys. I would argue if you're not taking one of those top three guys who will probably be gone in the 1st round, you'd be better off just not taking one at all. Unless there's a Drew Brees in this class who really should be the top pick but ends up slipping to the 2nd because of his size, you're taking a guy at the most important position in football that none of the 32 teams thought was worthy of their 1st round pick. To me, that's getting cute just like we did when we drafted Quincy Carter.
If we want an heir-apparent in this draft, he HAS to be the best guy we can get. That's where I stand, anyway.
And I swear if anyone gets in here and says Kellen Moore is the quarterback of the future…. LOL
It does, which is why I wouldn't want to take a guy who'd be 4th/5th in a better class at the 4th overall pick. The reason I'm okay with taking someone in the 2nd is that you can part ways with that guy and not feel nearly the same impact as dumping someone you took 4th overall.
Like I said before, I think we're getting way too antsy about QB this year because of what happened in 2015. Don't overrate and take a guy out of desperation. That's my fear.
I'm not stuck on taking one of these guys "just because." I just legitimately think any one of the three could be groomed into a very good NFL quarterback over the next couple seasons. I still reject the idea that they'd be the #4 or #5 ranked guys in a "normal" class. The 2016 quarterback class is perfectly normal. The 2015 class was top-heavy… that's not normal. The single-biggest knock on Goff and Lynch is nothing more than WHERE they went to college. If one of them had gone to FSU or Georgia, we're having an entirely different conversation right now… one that involves a trade with the Titans to secure the #1 pick.
Other than the fact that you don't get the opportunity to draft the top one or two quarterbacks in any draft, I also don't see anyone from a different position that gets me super excited. I'd be happy with Jalen Ramsey or Laquan Treadwell, but I can't guarantee you either won't be the next Morris Claiborne. Outside of Tunsil or maybe Bosa, I don't have complete confidence in anyone, really.
Well, the thing about Goff and that Cal system is that it does scare me to an extent. I've always had to be incredibly careful when I've worded this, but guys out of that system are indeed system quarterbacks. That does in fact mean that I'm calling Aaron Rodgers a system QB. The bigger issue is that we frown upon this term so much.
What does system QB truly mean? It means you have a QB that thrives in one specific offense, and your best suited running his offense. However, you can also expect him to compete if there is a sudden change in offensive philosophy – something you want to see from a top 5 pick should we get Goff. The Packers chose the first option here, basically reconstructing Rodgers' college system with receivers that fit the mold and let him do his thing.
He also got to sit and learn for a few years. Insert Goff to the Cowboys, where I believe a similar offense is already in place. Besides being able to learn from Romo and play behind this offensive line, I would love to see him ability to quickly get the ball to guys like Bryant, Beasley and even Williams. I am skeptical of a team drafting Goff with the expectation that he can do anything you ask of him as soon as he takes his first snap.
However, I have no concerns with the Cowboys taking him, understanding what his strengths and weaknesses are, and then pointing him in the direction of Tony Romo to further work on those two things.
Very well-worded, @Sean Martin.
It sort of escaped my mind completely that Aaron Rodgers also went to Cal. That's probably part of the reason people seem to be a little more comfortable with Goff as an NFL quarterback than they are Paxton Lynch.
Being careful when calling someone a system quarterback…. I like that you said that. Marcus Mariota was a system quarterback. He is perhaps the best example of a system quarterback above anyone we've seen come through the draft in quite a while and still there was talk that he might be be a better prospect than Jameis Winston. It's just harder to accurately gauge how their success will translate into a pro style offense.
But as you say and as I've said, that only really matters when you need a guy to start right away. When you throw a system quarterback into a pro style offense with nothing but one training camp, you run the risk of him struggling significantly for perhaps the first time in his entire football career and it's unpredictable as to how he'll respond to that. A lot of guys lose their confidence and that can tank their entire career. Football is every bit as much about what's in between the ears as it is physical I just can't underscore enough how unique of an opportunity it is to be able to draft a potential future franchise quarterback and not have to rely on him right away.
Here's what I think the difference is between the way I think and the way a lot of other people think regarding top college quarterbacks: I believe –strongly, actually– that allowing a quarterback time to groom and develop is the absolute key to transitioning a quarterback from college success to NFL success.
The latest example is Brock Osweiler. The Broncos snagged him in the 2nd round way back in 2012 and the guy has hardly played until this season. He wasn't phenomenal and obviously Denver has gone back to Peyton when it matters most, but he was plug-and-play good at this stage. Now, would this have been possible if they needed Osweiler to start right away? For me personally, I think he'd have flopped and probably been out of the league by now.
What about Carson Palmer, guys? The Bengals took him with the 1st overall pick in 2003 and he didn't play a snap that season. They started Jon Kitna over Palmer, and I'd argue when healthy, Palmer has probably been one of the top 5 quarterbacks of the last decade. I attribute a lot of that to being given the opportunity to learn.
Aaron Rodgers is an obvious example. Drew Brees was given a year under Doug Flutie, I believe. We'll never know how guys like Tony Romo and Tom Brady would have fared if they were starters from day one.
I believe there are quite a few draft busts who might have benefited from grooming. I'd list them off, but the question can be raised for pretty much any Day One starter who flopped in his career.Tim Couch and David Carr are two guys I think could have been phenomenal. Add Joey Harrington to that list. I even wonder about Ryan Leaf sometimes and how he might have benefited from learning underneath somebody.
That's really where my head is on it. I believe grooming works, and I believe if you're going to groom then why not start out with the most elite talent you can get? And if you can groom for two seasons, that's awesome. Three is not even outrageous.
Goff is the only one I would take a chance on. Quick Release is huge and very good arm strength. However he will be gone at #4. I rarely miss on evaluating QB talent.
Yup, Mariota a system guy and the Titans run his system very well, What could be very interesting is the Cowboys willingness to bring in a QB if they feel Linehan won't be around much longer. We all expect the offense to be fine with Romo back, but if they struggle he'll be quickly onto the hot seat and then if you have a guy like Goff sitting there you've created a mess.
Outstanding point.
I think it's easy to want to dismiss this point and say the Cowboys would never consider the risk of a quarterback controversy because Romo is so well-liked and so well-established within the Cowboys fan base, but the facts suggest otherwise.
It doesn't happen often, but when a quarterback struggles… and it doesn't matter if he's one of the all-time greats and a Super Bowl champion… having a #4 overall pick waiting in the wings is going to create a controversy.
And based on what I've experienced this year, don't be shocked when there is actually a subset of fans calling for Kellen Moore to replace Romo during the season next year if he struggles for any extended period of time. It sounds crazy, but that is literally how delusional the Kellen Moore-love has become.
Having Goff at #2 and Moore at #3 would definitely be a headache in that regard unless Romo has another 30-touchdown, <10 interception season next year.
Dallas sure picked the wrong year to tank. Watson is a franchise QB.
I have to agree with Sean on this one. It's time for Jerry to finally pull the trigger and draft Romo's heir apparent in the first round of the NFL Draft.
I have to agree with Sean on this issue. It's time for Jerry to finally pull the trigger and draft Romo's heir apparent in the first round of the NFL Draft.
Take a QB in the first round no more tempting to have a backup for a season if Tony gets hurt…it's time to start grooming our future…
now that the cleveland browns has signed hue jackson as head coach and with his close association with NFL reporter Mike Silver, I think the Jared Goff, will be gone by the time the Cowboys select at # 4, unless the Cowboys decides to jump to # 1 with Tennessee, which I doubt. I don't see the Cowboys taking a quarterback until the 2nd round, if Jerry pulls the trigger. Otherwise, Romo will continue to be the option until Romo hangs it up. At the beginning I was excited that the Cowboys was going to take a step toward the future. Now I am not for sure, especially with the Browns hiring Jackson and the connection between jackson and goff, both have the bay area connection. I think it will be a mistake if Jerry signs Manziel, a leopard never change it's spots or if it quack like a duck, walks like a duck, it's a duck. The Browns are going to be great with goff at the helm, especially, with hue jackson doing the play-calling.
Yeah the fear at this point is that the Browns will actually be smart for once and ruin the Cowboys chances at Goff haha. Still a lot of talent to be had at #4, as well as in the later rounds for this QB class.
now that hue jackson has been hired as the new head coach of the cleveland browns, I don't see the Cowboys having the opportunity to draft Goff at the # 4 spot. Jackson and goff both have a bay area connection, and jackson will craft his offense around goff's strength. It would have been a dream come true, if goff was selected to sit behind Romo. I think the Cowboys will select Carson Wentz, as the future quarterback of the Cowboys, in the second round. It would be a mistake if Jerry was to trade or sign Manziel, a leopard can't change his spots, in addition, I don't think Romo would like the ideal of being a babysitter. This just my opinion, you no in the NFL, things change constanly, so there still maybe hope that Goff will still be available, if the Browns choose another quarterback, which I doubt. It appears also that lynch will fall to the Rams.
i really don't think Wentz gets past the first half of the first round. it would be great if he fell to the second, but i don't see any way that happens.
It will be a very interesting draft this year for "The Boys". I believe that, barring major injuries, the Cowboy will be a ligitament Super Bowl contender in 2016 . Therefore not having a top 5 pick for a long time to come. It would be OK if the took Lynch to sit and learn behind Mr. Romo and Wade Wilson. But I'd prefer they address the problems in the secondary (Ramsey) which would obviously help the "D" line. More rushing time = more sacks = more chances for turnovers. Just a life long Cowboy fans humble opinion.
Not a fan of Lynch, so if it does come down to him and Ramsey I would agree on taking Ramsey. If a guy like Jack is there I may lean towards him though. Still early in the process and a lot will change, but thanks for reading and sharing your opinion. You're right about it being an interesting draft and even more right about being contenders next year!
you sure are more optimistic about this team next year than i am. this defense has MANY holes. our best CB coming back off a major knee injury. Claiborne and Carr are average at best. we have the worst safety tandem in the league. only one LB spot is solidified. we still have an below average pass rush, though i'm high on Gregory being able to help some. the offense is all about health. this team seeme to me as more of a fringe playoff team. i don't see any major help in free agency and the draft can only help, but i definitely don't see a sure thing playoff team.
I agree with Ron in theory.
It's an arrogant way of thinking that we are just ready to go and compete in 2016 no matter what on the defensive side of the ball. Scoffing at that for the sake of a potential QB of the future is a very risky move.
Sent from my iPad using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app
I don't know if arrogance has much to do with it whether or not someone wants to pursue a quarterback with our first round pick. I think it's a long-term lens versus a short-term lens.
My contention is that if they believe Jared Goff, for example, is a future franchise quarterback, they should position themselves to select him. I understand that many of us question whether a guy like Goff would even be a first round talent if this were a different QB class, but I believe ultimately that is for the scouts to decide. If they think this kid is the real deal, and they are within 2 spots of where he will be selected, they have to do some serious thinking about that.
Defensive linemen, wide receivers, linebackers, and particularly cornerbacks bust in the top 10 as much as anyone else. The reality is that you could pass up a potential franchise quarterback to draft Treadwell, and he could be the next Roy Williams while Jared Goff could go on to be the next Peyton Manning. It would go down in history as the biggest draft flub in Dallas Cowboys history.
Of course, the opposite could be true as well. Goff could be the next Akili Smith and Treadwell the next Andre Johnson. My biggest challenge to folks in this conversation is to recognize both of those (or neither) are distinct possibilities.
I say arrogance because is it not an admission that they feel they can compete against every other team with no immediate first round impact?
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app
Our second round pick will likely be a first round talent. Plus we have 3 first round talents playing in their sophomore season next year
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
It was that mentality that haunted us in the 2009 draft!!
Our CB and Safeties combination are among the worst in the league!
I would love to get a QB have been screaming it for years! I feel the pro days and the combine are going to be a tell tell sign on these QBs! if Goff is available I think that would be the only QB I would take
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can't just bank on the 2015 class or assume that your 2nd pick is a "first round talent." You're forfeiting a guaranteed first round talent on that presumption.
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app
I still have to agree with Sean on this issue. The Cowboys can still have their cake and eat it. Drafting Romo's heir apparent doesn't stop the Cowboys from pursuing the goal of winning the Super Bowl. The Cowboys will be able to accomplish both goals, short term and long term.
"Having their cake and eating it too" is not only one of the worst phrases ever (that's a separate issue), but it's an extremely irresponsible line of thinking that will bury you in anything. It's an arrogant disposition that will cost you greatly.
Sent from my iPad using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app
Not this again…
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
I too agree with Ronmexico in the sense that we are not a 2016 playoff team going in with the roster we currently have. It is somewhat "arrogant" to think we don't need help on defense. Especially in the secondary. Drafting Bosa (DE) and pick up Sean Smith or Eric Berry in free agency or Ramsey at 4 and maybe trade back into the late 1st (27) to get Noah Spence (give up our 2nd & a 5th). Drafting the best players available in round 3-7 will be the best way to strengthen the team. If there aren't any qbs that are the best players available when its our turn to draft, then don't reach for one. Hopefully we have a lot less needs after next season. If thats the case, we can afford to trade up and get us a franchise qb next draft if there is one WORTHY of the pick. If Goff is gone, there aren't any other qbs WORTHY of the #4 pick. Lets not reach for a qb this year just because we have the #4 pick.
This will likely change multiple times as we go, but I've had a strong feeling lately that we will take BPA at #4 (non-QB) and then that Jerry will get us back into the first round for Wentz.
The dilemma that the Cowboys brass is facing is that they do not want to draft high on a qb only to have him warm the bench while we groom him for 3-4 years while paying him a lot because he was drafted 4th overall. Then if after 4 years Romo is still playing at an elite status, what are you gonna do? Can't afford to keep both anymore. Force Romo into retirement? Cut Romo? Or give up the highly drafted, highly paid, well groomed qb over to another team to reap the benefits? All while we could use the #4 pick on a player that will start immediately and help the team improve from day 1. What makes more sense to you? Given the qbd in this draft, I'll got defense @ #4 imho
Wentz looks average to say it nicely. I might toss the rest of my Dallas stuff away if he is drafted in round 1.
What don't you like about him, Blue Star?
Sean, I think Bluestar said Wentz "looks average to put ot nicely". It would be a terrible choice to draft an "average" player at #4 overall. We can get "average" in the 4th round. We need "Franchise Player" @ #4. Not bench warmer. I think thats what he meant. If so, I agree with Bluestar
A 1st rounder should be an instant starter, not a project
@FanInHawaii Says who? Bad teams. Teams way off from contending. Take away 2 injuries in 2015 and the Cowboys are contenders. And one of those injuries is at the position we're talking about. Whether we're talking Wentz, Lynch, Goff, or some other QB at #4, that logic is just not helpful. ALL QBs benefit from being groomed. Most high-picks are thrown into the fire too early and have to make it work, but grooming is always better when the position is so different from NCAA to NFL football. So no, that first pick shouldn't be an instant starter unless he's the BPA, and BPA is how you handle it. Not by expectations the first year. I keep seeing this attitude and I just can't understand how people prefer to act desperate about the draft and free agency. Thank god for Will McClay because he's smart, not desperate. Thanks for reading 😉
Bryce, isn't it desperate to draft an "average" player in the 1st? I understand that you want to spend 2-3 years to groom a qb. I agree. But if he's gonna be a 2-3 year project, why not get him in round 3-5? Should all qbs be drafted in the 1st? Name all the teams that support your theory Bryce. Does New England draft a qb in the 1st round every few years? The last time thwy drafted a qb in the 1st was in 93. Same with the Seahawks. Arizona last did in 2006 but W Lienhart didnt do jack. The Broncos last drafted Tebow in the 1st, we all know how that went. Thats the 4 teams in this years NFL championships. Besides the Packers, who else do you consider "good" or "better" or even "best" teams that do what you say by drafting a qb in the 1st because they expect them to be great but not start year 1. How has that helped them get to the super bowl the way you say we would have been if we drafted & groomed a qb in the 1st 3 yrs ago? I guess the Seahawks got it wrong when they picked Wilson in the 3rd. Or New England got it wrong picking Brady in the 6th. They were both in last years Super Bowl. Why did they wait so long to draft them. What about undrafted Romo? Because they were project qbs, meant to learn for a few years until they are ready. Besides Rodgers, how many other 1st rd picks sat for 4 years before they were ready? Usually its a mid round pick that they use to groom. That way you dont need to pay top dollar for a 3 year redshirt. There is a salary cap. Depth at every position is very important. But it just isnt practical to expect to have 2 starting caliber qbs on tour team at one time. Hell, teams are having a hard enough time findimg 1 starting caliber qb. And those with 2 startimg caliber qbs usually lose the 2nd (backup) to another team who can pay him & offer him a starting job. I guess you need to hold a seminar and invite all the people involved in drafting in the NFL because it seems even they don't see it your way.
It's Bryson, actually, and regarding the later round pick because he'll be groomed anyway; you can buy a $1,000 (late-round pick) car and dump all sorts of money into it (grooming), but in the end, you're still left with a $1,000 car (Doh!). Now, go back and read my last comment again because you clearly missed something. I said BPA; what part of Best Player Available says to you that I meant an average player???
…I'm just here to say that Wentz is not average but instead very good. Carry on.
Sorry Bryson. I thought we were talking about NFL quartevacks, not cars. And you can take a $1000 car, restore it and sell it for $50000. People do it all the time. Look it up. People make a living buying wrecks or cars with engine problems, then rebuild them and sell them for profit. But that is besides the point I read your BPA comment and Wentz is far from BPA at #4. Now tell me what team supports your theory?
Pretty sure he was using the car comparison to make a point, and in my opinion, a good one at that. Also, I don't see where this restoring cars analogy is going. If it's a metaphor for trying to develop and get the most out of a late round QB, you may be onto something. I did a film review of Jeff Driskel and was very impressed. But I also acknowledge that I currently have a huge gap between Goff and Wentz and then any other draft eligible QBs.
The comparison was a 6th rounder ($1000 car) no matter how much grooming (dumping miney into it) is still a 6th round pick. Explain 3rd round Russell Wilson, 6th round Brady, undrafted Romo, Kurt Warner, the list goes on and on. Grooming a qb that you pick outside of round one CAN work. (Doh!)
Right, it absolutely can. And it may be the direction they go. But when you get a chance to buy an Audi, and you can afford to do so, you take the Audi.
I respect your choice Sean. But if I had the money for an Audi, I'd buy a Lexus. Personal preference I guess. Actually I do have a Lexus, IS350, and am very happy with it. If I had to do it all again, I would do the same thing and buy the Lexus.
Audi's holds no value. Lexus are not fun to drive. I drive a BMW 3 series. Performance is everything. The Dallas Cowboys need to get a guy who has performed well during game time and sits well above the top of his class.
Yeah, whatever makes you happy as far as sports cars. Every draft people will disagree on QBs – all that really matters is how McClay and this staff rank them and who slides to them when
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
Are we trying to say goff is an Audi?!?!?! No, cam newton/Peyton manning were Audis! Someone with Potential is exactly by definition is "having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future"!
Future very key!!!!!
An Audi is something you drive off the lot and go pick up the hottest girl in!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Are we trying to say goff is an Audi?!?!?! No, cam newton/Peyton manning were Audis! Someone with Potential is exactly by definition is "having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future"!
Future very key!!!! Showing the capacity as well
4th overall better not be that! Exactly why Claiborne might be on his way out!
4th overall means you better be the hype or your team takes a step back!!!
An Audi is something you drive off the lot and go pick up the hottest girl in, not something you keep in a storage garage for a couple years!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah and every year teams over reach on avg QBs because they are "the best in the draft"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What an odd turn that car analogy took…. Anyway, kind of bumming me out that you have no idea what a $1,000 car is. Good for you, I guess. But a $1k roller classic that can be restored is not a car you buy because you HAVE to have a car to get to WORK; it's a 20-year-old POS that barely passes inspection and really teaches you about paying attention when you drive because of all the issues it has. If you knew what it was, that analogy would have made more sense to you, unless you just like to argue (still an option at this point). Point is, you draft late round players and groom them because that's their only option at first with low-round talent. It needs to be taught, refined, pushed. Top-round talent needs less of that, but benefits from the grooming just the same. You can never have enough talent. The 'Boys will go BPA in the first and if they feel that a QB fits the bill then so be it. He will not start in 2016 unless Romo gets injured (and prob not even then) and that extra time to learn without being thrown in the fire will make him a better QB the day he finally does start. It boils down to this: considering that grooming is grooming, the better the raw material, the better the end result will be after the grooming. A 1st-round (whether top-5 or not) QB is better raw material than a 5th-rounder. Plain. Simple.
BPA- is definitely what we are saying, but this thread by name is saying QB not BPA!
There is an argument (maybe not yours) but an argument none the less to take the best QB at 4!
I think thet can get a QB in the 2-3 rds and still be better than the 1k Pos but that's just me!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Goff might easily be BPA. I do think he's that good. But we will certainly see how things play out after the Combine and Pro Days and such.
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
CJ, I agree. They might be able to do that and there is certainly a case to be made for going QB at #4 after last season. But I tell you, if one of the top four QBs is looking to fall out of the top ten, Jerry Jones will trade back.
But my argument was simply that requiring first year players to start is a move of desperation at certain positions, like QB. Most of the time the team has no choice in the matter but the Cowboys do. Take the chance while they have a top five pick to get a good QB and then groom him for a year or two. Should be pretty damned sharp when he does finally start.
Sent from the Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums app for Android. Get it at bit.ly/PigskinHub
Bryson- I could definitely see that being an option, I truly do. I think the only option would be goff.
Do you feel our secondary is an area that might be looked at?!?!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem I'm seeing is that I see a lot of people (not just people in this thread) getting too worked-up on analyzing these quarterbacks as "Day One" starters. I see people say they're overrated or they're average. Overrated or average based on what set of standards?
The best-case scenario for ANY player you draft is that you foresee him one day being an All-Pro caliber player. That doesn't mean he comes in and plays at an All-Pro level in his first game. You draft a guy at #4 because you believe he has the ability to be great. And the nice thing about the Cowboys' situation is they don't need him to be great today. They need him to be great in a few years.
When I look at the top three quarterbacks in this draft, I see big-time size, big-time arms, and guys who were immensely successful at the college level. Two of the three did not play for a pro-style offense, which unfortunately has become more and more common in the college game over the years.
Someone has to tell me exactly what criteria they're using to tell me these guys are overrated or that they're average and have no NFL potential. Until then, it just feels like fluff to me. Jalen Ramsey could be overrated or average. Joey Bosa could be overrated or average. Laquan Treadwell could be overrated or average. HOW are the quarterbacks in this draft more likely to be busts than anyone else? The reality is that I think people are basing their comments on draftniks who are talking about these guys' ability to come in and save a struggling franchise on Day One. The Cowboys have the opportunity to draft a guy without worrying about how good he will be right out of the gate.
We've got people saying Kellen Moore can be a franchise quarterback, and those same people saying Goff/Lynch/Wentz are going to be busts. Come on.
Yes I do. Our secondary has been a bit rocky and I expect they'll look to both the draft and free agency to shore up the back end. I think Jerome Henderson will help get things moving back there. If they don't go QB in the first, then of course I'd be happy with a guy like Ramsey.
Best. Line. Ever. Nothing says it better than that.
I'm a lot more comfortable with the "we need a 'win now' guy at #4" viewpoint than I am with the "none of these guys are any good" viewpoint. You'd have to flat-out be a legend to be able to look at these three guys and be able to say definitively that they won't amount to anything when called upon in a few years to lead this franchise. That would take the kind of foresight that NFL teams would pay millions for.
Frankly, I don't know how you evaluate these quarterbacks for the Cowboys' situation because it comes up so rarely that a team can look at a quarterback through this lens.
Unscripted Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Cam and Peyton were BMW's. They were known for performance prior to the NFL.
Zac, you know why people think a QB is more of a bust than a WR. Getting the QB totally wrong really sets teams back back. They could of been developing another player. Teams need to draft TWO QB's and do not put all eggs in one basket. To me Washington Redskins were the only team that did the right thing because that is what I would do. Cousins was a very good college player that produced in the Big Ten. I like QB's from power conferences. Big school Qb's are use to big games. Huge crowds. Bigger egos of their teammates (Maybe why Romo could not handle Owens).
Jets, Ravens, Dallas, SF, Vikings (Louisville was not in ACC during Bridgewater years) have QBs not from the power conferences. One of those teams made the playoffs this year. Flacco does have a superbowl ring so he helps smaller school QB's.
If someone is saying Kellen Moore is a franchise QB they must either be sleeping with him or graduated from Boise state.
I can agree with you on that.
I think this debate gets down to philosophy. I think your philosophy is that quarterbacks are either destined for greatness or they're not. IE: If a quarterback like David Carr is drafted #1 overall and ends up being a bust in the NFL, that was always what was going to happen. Guys like JaMarcus Russell, David Carr, Joey Harrington (etc) were destined to be busts from the start and a great scout should have foreseen that. I can understand why it would seem that way.
My contention is that Russell, Harrington, and especially Carr could have been great NFL quarterbacks if they had been brought into their roles properly. If David Carr could have sat and been groomed for a year or two, I have all the confidence in the world he could have been one of the greats. Russell probably would have ultimately been a bust, but he'd have been better off for getting the opportunity to sit and learn. Tim Couch could have been great, also.
When I look at prospective NFL quarterbacks, size and arm strength mean a lot to me. Seeing them make all the throws and minimize mistakes in college is also important. There is no college program in the entire country that can prepare you to be the quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys. I don't care if it's Alabama or Georgia… the stage just doesn't compare. The quarterback is going to have to be smart, and he's going to have to be mature. He has to be coachable and he has to be able to grasp the enormity of what he's walking into without folding under the pressure. I just don't believe you can understate how huge it would be to be able to get a top college talent and let him sit as an understudy for a couple years. It will help that transition in a huge way. By the time he is relied on to start, again, it won't matter if he went to Alabama or Iowa State, because he will have been exposed to the Dallas Cowboys spotlight for long enough.
As far as the talent of these guys, I can't pretend to be a scout or an expert. Carson Wentz has a rocket for an arm…. same with Goff and Lynch. I'll let Will McClay decide if one of these guys is worth the #4 overall pick. I'm just saying philosophically I like the idea, and I think IF the Cowboys get a quarterback at #4 overall or even with their second round pick, that player will come into the league with more advantage than any 1st/2nd round quarterback since Aaron Rodgers. And that excites me a lot.
Getting it wrong absolutely does suck, but going in there scared that you may get it wrong also doesn't help. If they take that approach, and draft a late round QB that likely has no hope of ever actually being the future starter, it's another wasted pick. Yes, they got a QB, but it's not a top talent and it's a pick that could have been used elsewhere.
BPA at four without considering injuries is Jaylon Smith.
Is Jack off the board?
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
"Unscriribe" Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
^ No, Jack is on the board. Jaylon Smith film is great. Jaylon wont play in 2016 so hes not exactly worth the 4th pick.
Why we wanna be drafting Will Smith's kids?
Sent from my SM-N900V using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app
lol his kids are jaden and trey lol. will wished his son trey could ball.
I still think we're going to trade this pick, and next year's #1, for Marques Colston or Vincent Jackson. Jerry is overdue for one of those moves.
Wut.
Here's a point blank, blunt opinion: I'd like to see the Cowboys take a quarterback here but if they don't, they're idiots if they don't take Laquon Treadwell.
Looking at the failure of the 2015 season, I STILL think the lack of offensive playmakers while Romo was out and Dez was hobbled TRUMPS EVERYTHING.
The offense graded out 22nd in the league overall, and 27th in passing. Not that the defense was great, but they were harmed by shoddy offensive play for much of the season. When I think of a guy who can help us immediately with that #4 overall pick, Treadwell stands head and shoulders above them all. Two Dez Bryants on the field? Sign me up.
My only trepidation there is that I can think of just as many WR busts in the top 10 as quarterback busts.
I'm confident about the 2016 defense. I think Claiborne or Carr stays. I think DeMarcus Lawrence and Randy Gregory are going to ball out in the pass rush. They can pick up a guy or two in free agency at CB/LB as well as drafting a couple guys at that position. I just feel like the defense is easier to patch. If we go into 2016 with the same set of wide receivers as 2015, I think we're in trouble.
I don't want a QB, but I do think Treadwell is a biiiiiit of a luxury pick. I've come around to wanting it more on defense.
Sent from my iPad using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app
WTF MAN!?
I finally go full-Treadwell and you already jumped off the bandwagon?
As usual, I can never find a seat at the cool table.
Plenty of seats left in the Team Goff room. With comfy seats to go
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
Plenty of seats left in the Team Goff room. With comfy seats to go
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
Oh I'm definitely on Team Goff, but I'm operating under the assumption that the Browns will snake him from us and we'll be forced to look elsewhere.
I'm not opposed to Wentz or Lynch, either, but if we can't get Goff (but are set on a QB in the 1st) I'd just assume trade back a little bit and get whichever one of them drops to, say pick #10.
Assuming we can't get Goff and we're set on drafting at #4 anyway, I'm on Team Treadwell. I just think the best-case scenario of Treadwell being a big-time talent yields us way more upside than anyone else you can get there. With the lack of playmakers in this offense right now, I just can't imagine a linebacker or a cornerback having the potential impact of a guy like Treadwell.
Does signing miller change that at all? Would certainly open up the passing game and can maybe (by a long shot) revive T-Will to some respectable lebel
Sent from my iPhone using Pigskin Hub – Pro Football Forums mobile app. Check out InsideTheStar.com!
Well there are lots of things that can be done in free agency or via a trade that could change the landscape quite a bit. I actually see a lot of potential free agent targets on defense that could really fill some holes but you're right, there are some offensive free agents that could swing things the other way as well.
To be honest, I'm significantly nervous about our passing game. I understand Dez has come out now and said he was basically injured all season and I'd love to believe he will bounce back in 2016, but I've always felt like Dez was volatile. Seems like he goes through bouts of being injured, or his head just not being in the game. I believe he's a "boom or bust" kind of guy, and that goes game-to-game, month-to-month, and even season-to-season.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Dez Bryant fan. I'm just not sure I trust him to be my primary playmaker anymore. I really want some solid insurance at that position.