We had such a bad draft

[fdarugar]

Actually he made some very good points.

Really.

You are the worst of the bunch, I skim right thru your posts after I see that Ginn & Juice sig. The guys name is prenounced differently anyways and I don't get what he has to do with the cowboys or julius jones...

:dallasuck

14-13

[bulldog]

let's get serious for a minute. the fact we drafted Broughton in round 7 instead of a DE is NOT the reason this team is 5-5 and the DL is in shambles :laugh:

not unless that 7th round pick is a real doozy

the argument that should be made here for the anti-Gibbs posters is the strategy of letting Smoot go and then drafting Carlos Rogers.

For you guys that argument carries more weight as keeping Smoot and paying him would have allowed the team to take a DE or LB that rushes the passer at #9 like Merriman or Ware.

[ThornWithin]

You are the worst of the bunch, I skim right thru your posts after I see that Ginn & Juice sig. The guys name is prenounced differently anyways and I don't get what he has to do with the cowboys or julius jones...

:dallasuck

14-13

*sigh*.

He has nothing to do with the Cowboys. I am a lifelong Cowboys fan who is a student at Ohio State. Yes, I understand his name is pronounced differently than the word "Gin", its just a harmless sig line.

Although I am flattered that you consider me to be the worst of the bunch. I never would have imagined that I was that much of a thorn in anyone's side.

[fdarugar]

*sigh*.

He has nothing to do with the Cowboys. I am a lifelong Cowboys fan who is a student at Ohio State. Yes, I understand his name is pronounced differently than the word "Gin", its just a harmless sig line.

Although I am flattered that you consider me to be the worst of the bunch. I never would have imagined that I was that much of a thorn in anyone's side.

r u from dallas or do you just like their colors? And how does the juice come into the mix?

[ThornWithin]

let's get serious for a minute. the fact we drafted Broughton in round 7 instead of a DE is NOT the reason this team is 5-5 and the DL is in shambles :laugh:

not unless that 7th round pick is a real doozy

I agree with you on this one. For the Cowboy fans I was chatting with at the time, it was just funny to see Washington draft its second "fullback" (based on the information at hand to the non-Redskins diehard at the time, I do understand your argument Art) in Broughton.

However, I think an argument could be made that drafting White in the fourth was a mistake for a team that has holes to fill elsewhere. If I remember right, Chris Canty was still on the board at the time, but I'm not totally sure.

[bulldog]

almost none of the self-reporting Cowboys fans are from Dallas. most are disaffected folks that grew up in areas with other teams and decided to become contrarians to rebel against their fathers (and where applicable, mothers)

how's that for some Tuesday night psycho-babble :laugh:

[KillaCam21]

We can't predict how well certain players will do, but we can take chances on players in positions of need. We NEEDED another wideout. We needed another corner and we needed a couple D-linemen. We drafted Rogers, but we didn't fill any other needs. In the later rounds, you have to take players at positions of need and hope you get lucky.

The Broncos are a good example of a team drafting a bunch of players at one position. They needed another corner opposite RCB because Walls wasn't working out so they drafted corners in the second, third, and fourth rounds. Luckily, their second on fourth (?) round picks turned out to be really solid players even as rookies. They drafted three corners who had sub 4.4 40 times and they have two proven guys already.

We need to start drafting a bunch of linemen in the middle rounds in order to fix our problems. I know we haven't had many mid round picks in recent years, but we need to start soon.

[ThornWithin]

r u from dallas or do you just like their colors?

My dad became a Cowboys fan after the Ice Bowl (Against the Packers) back in the sixties. By the time I was born in 1986, it was in my blood.

I get frustrated about the timing of things because I used to take a lot of trash for being a "bandwagoner", but it was never like that. By the time I was old enough to appreciate Football, the Cowboys were on their rise to the top in the early nineties. I actually wish I would have been born a few years earlier, so I really could have appreciated those super bowls. At the time, it seemed automatic, which is why its so exciting to see the team finally heading up towards being successful again.

[fdarugar]

My dad became a Cowboys fan after the Ice Bowl (Against the Packers) back in the sixties. By the time I was born in 1986, it was in my blood.

I get frustrated about the timing of things because I used to take a lot of trash for being a "bandwagoner", but it was never like that. By the time I was old enough to appreciate Football, the Cowboys were on their rise to the top in the early nineties. I actually wish I would have been born a few years earlier, so I really could have appreciated those super bowls. At the time, it seemed automatic, which is why its so exciting to see the team finally heading up towards being successful again.

So you are a 2nd generation bandwagoner... :applause:

Give this man a medal.

:dallasuck

:laugh:

[ThornWithin]

So you are a 2nd generation bandwagoner... :applause:

Give this man a medal.

:dallasuck

:laugh:

Hey tex...we lost the Ice Bowl.

In fact, at the time we had never won much of anything.

"Next Year's Champions."

[bulldog]

yeah, but the Cowboys were still division champs.

why not root for the expansion Saints or Falcons back in '67? :laugh: :laugh:

[Art]

We can't predict how well certain players will do, but we can take chances on players in positions of need. We NEEDED another wideout. We needed another corner and we needed a couple D-linemen. We drafted Rogers, but we didn't fill any other needs. In the later rounds, you have to take players at positions of need and hope you get lucky.

The Broncos are a good example of a team drafting a bunch of players at one position. They needed another corner opposite RCB because Walls wasn't working out so they drafted corners in the second, third, and fourth rounds. Luckily, their second on fourth (?) round picks turned out to be really solid players even as rookies. They drafted three corners who had sub 4.4 40 times and they have two proven guys already.

We need to start drafting a bunch of linemen in the middle rounds in order to fix our problems. I know we haven't had many mid round picks in recent years, but we need to start soon.

Why did we need another wideout in the later rounds when we had that player in McCants who didn't make the team? We may have needed a legitimate threat at receiver, but we got that in Moss. We could still use a legitimate second option at receiver, though, with Cooley, it's hard to see three guys all looking good for between 900 and 1,500 yards so you kind of have what you have when your top two threats are on pace for over 2,000 yards.

We did need a developing QB, a replacement corner, someone at middle backer, someone behind Cooley and someone to develop as a big, short yardage back. We got all that. We also needed some more young blood on the defensive line and we still need that. But, we did actually land a number of positions we can clearly identify as areas we had to improve in and over time we'll see which of our picks provide that for us.

That said, I agree completely with you that the strategy to flood certain positions with draft picks to see what shakes out can be successful as the early competition can really pull someone ahead of the rest and make a pro that way but you often have a number of flops that way.

[ThornWithin]

yeah, but the Cowboys were still division champs.

why not root for the expansion Saints or Falcons? :laugh: :laugh:

Why not? How about why?

I like asking that question. Considering I was just about negative twenty years old at the time, no, I can't be sure why my Dad became a Cowboys fan. But why didn't he become a Packers fan?

Don't get me riled up about this, it can't be good for my health.

[fdarugar]

Hey tex...we lost the Ice Bowl.

In fact, at the time we had never won much of anything.

"Next Year's Champions."

you don't have to prove anything to me, bud. my family bleeds b&g cuz we are from the area, we go to the games, through thick and thin. next time you look at yourself in the mirror with your roy williams jersey remind yourself of why you are a cowboy fan. i know i was born in to it.

[Bonez3]

I think its quite funny how with the draft, even our first round pick (9th overall) is on the bench most of the game....and we drafted like 8 LB's and a handful of fullbacks when we needed a DE and a receiver....whats with our GM?

Y- we shouldn't have drafted CB- we're stocked there. And most every CB in the league is a star after 10 games. Especially, the CB's this year Ms. Pac Man and Antrlle IR Rolle.

Or maybe we could have got M. Williams he seems to be a starring after 10 games.

And don't insult your own IQ and bring up Fred Smoots name for any reason.

[ThornWithin]

Why did we need another wideout in the later rounds when we had that player in McCants who didn't make the team? We may have needed a legitimate threat at receiver, but we got that in Moss. We could still use a legitimate second option at receiver, though, with Cooley, it's hard to see three guys all looking good for between 900 and 1,500 yards so you kind of have what you have when your top two threats are on pace for over 2,000 yards.

We did need a developing QB, a replacement corner, someone at middle backer, someone behind Cooley and someone to develop as a big, short yardage back. We got all that. We also needed some more young blood on the defensive line and we still need that. But, we did actually land a number of positions we can clearly identify as areas we had to improve in and over time we'll see which of our picks provide that for us.

That said, I agree completely with you that the strategy to flood certain positions with draft picks to see what shakes out can be successful as the early competition can really pull someone ahead of the rest and make a pro that way but you often have a number of flops that way.

I can see your point about not truly needing a wide reciever, however, I don't agree that you needed a developing QB. That was supposed to be the role Ramsey was filling, according to what Gibbs had said during the offseason about the team being behind Ramsey.

Every draft pick is beneficial. Even if the skins didn't draft the kind of players their defensive line could use, they did draft players that could/should help them out down the road at other positions. You don't necissarily draft for need, as much as you do talent. I still think that Washington made a number of curious decisions on draft weekend though, most of which are centered around giving up three draft picks for Jason Campbell (Or should I say two, considering it was a swap of first rounders with two other picks added on).

[ThornWithin]

you don't have to prove anything to me, bud. my family bleeds b&g cuz we are from the area, we go to the games, through thick and thin. next time you look at yourself in the mirror with your roy williams jersey remind yourself of why you are a cowboy fan. i know i was born in to it.

And that's good to see.

I'm being serious, I don't mind having a polite conversation about something like this. It's always nice to see a fan of a team that's a lifelong fan, not a fan of a team simply because they won a superbowl. Even if my dad did become a fan as a bandwagoner (I really don't know his motivation to be honest), I know I was born a Cowboys fan, and that's what matters to me.

[fdarugar]

And that's good to see.

I'm being serious, I don't mind having a polite conversation about something like this. It's always nice to see a fan of a team that's a lifelong fan, not a fan of a team simply because they won a superbowl. Even if my dad did become a fan as a bandwagoner (I really don't know his motivation to be honest), I know I was born a Cowboys fan, and that's what matters to me.

fair enough. :logo:

[Art]

I can see your point about not truly needing a wide reciever, however, I don't agree that you needed a developing QB. That was supposed to be the role Ramsey was filling, according to what Gibbs had said during the offseason about the team being behind Ramsey.

Every draft pick is beneficial. Even if the skins didn't draft the kind of players their defensive line could use, they did draft players that could/should help them out down the road at other positions. You don't necissarily draft for need, as much as you do talent. I still think that Washington made a number of curious decisions on draft weekend though, most of which are centered around giving up three draft picks for Jason Campbell (Or should I say two, considering it was a swap of first rounders with two other picks added on).

The need for a young, developing No. 3 QB was clear as the veteran backup at the time wasn't going to be around forever and you wanted a No. 2 who could step in knowing your system in a year or two who'd developed within your system. What clouds the issue with Campbell is he was taken early, raising questions as to the real QB of the future.

That's a fair point. Had a 6-5, big armed, pretty athletic, pretty accurate QB been taken in the fifth round, no one would have argued it fit a need. Therefore, no one can argue it doesn't fit a need by taking him earlier. The real contrary point is if Campbell IS the future, then, we STILL need a developing young QB to fit behind HIM so we essentially back fill one young QB for another and hope he improves that position while leaving us a hole we have to address coming soon.

The Redskins gave up two picks to swap firsts and they chose Campbell. QBs need time to develop. Campbell is under no pressure. What value a free year of learning and growth on a professional team? It's worth a couple of picks. The fact that the Redskins got the better end of the trade on value charts in all but the most negative of seasons helps make the rationale for the value portion easier to understand.

What is very good though is you have this player with a free year of learning under his belt. He may not be totally ready next year, or he may. But, there's a great deal of value in having that out of the way.

[KillaCam21]

Why did we need another wideout in the later rounds when we had that player in McCants who didn't make the team? We may have needed a legitimate threat at receiver, but we got that in Moss. We could still use a legitimate second option at receiver, though, with Cooley, it's hard to see three guys all looking good for between 900 and 1,500 yards so you kind of have what you have when your top two threats are on pace for over 2,000 yards.

We did need a developing QB, a replacement corner, someone at middle backer, someone behind Cooley and someone to develop as a big, short yardage back. We got all that. We also needed some more young blood on the defensive line and we still need that. But, we did actually land a number of positions we can clearly identify as areas we had to improve in and over time we'll see which of our picks provide that for us.

That said, I agree completely with you that the strategy to flood certain positions with draft picks to see what shakes out can be successful as the early competition can really pull someone ahead of the rest and make a pro that way but you often have a number of flops that way.

We flooded the wrong positions. We drafted two H-Backs when we already had a good young starter in Cooley and a decent starter in Royal (obviously no one knew about Sellars at the time). We also drafted two (or three?) linebackers when we already had Arrington, Washington, Marshall, Clemons, and Campbell (I think we brought in Holdman after the draft). We needed defensive linemen and we didn't need four H-Backs and eight linebackers--Especially when those positions can be considered strengths with Cooley, Washington, and Arrington.

I don't mind the Jason Cambell pick even though at the time I wanted us to take Roddy White of UAB (He led the NCAA in receiving yards and had a great workout at the combine). I also like the Carlos Rogers pick because he was a great college player. We just needed to address different positions in the later rounds and we also need to stop giving up so many mid round picks.

[Art]

We flooded the wrong positions. We drafted two H-Backs when we already had a good young starter in Cooley and a decent starter in Royal (obviously no one knew about Sellars at the time). We also drafted two (or three?) linebackers when we already had Arrington, Washington, Marshall, Clemons, and Campbell (I think we brought in Holdman after the draft). We needed defensive linemen and we didn't need four H-Backs and eight linebackers--Especially when those positions can be considered strengths with Cooley, Washington, and Arrington.

I don't mind the Jason Cambell pick even though at the time I wanted us to take Roddy White of UAB (He led the NCAA in receiving yards and had a great workout at the combine). I also like the Carlos Rogers pick because he was a great college player. We just needed to address different positions in the later rounds and we also need to stop giving up so many mid round picks.

We didn't draft two H-Backs and Royal isn't an H-Back, he's a tight end. A uniquely different position in our offense. As for importance, Gibbs considers H-Back the most important position in his offense because he asks it to do so many things. Certainly flooding that level of importance would be smart if you're coaching and think it's that important to you. And he's more right than you as to needing another young late-round receiver when we already had them who was in process of failing. Why a new young receiver over McCants? Just cause he would be new?

We drafted two linebackers. Arrington didn't even return to camp until the third week of the preseason. He wasn't "right" physically for many weeks. We had an unproven guy in Marshall in the middle. We had no depth behind Holdman or Marshall if Arrington didn't get healthy or anyone got hurt. We needed linebackers like crazy. Only one may have worked out enough to have a future.

Cooley couldn't be considered a strength after his rookie year, merely a guy with potential to become a strength. Arrington couldn't be considered a strength given injury and uncertainty. He may still not be able to be considered that. The defensive line, though, WAS a strength just a year ago and was getting one of the game's TOP run defenders in Daniels back full time. Where linebacker lost players, no one was lost along the line. You could reasonably assume we needed something other than the line.

Now, I'm a line devotee. I want to see us draft six guys there and hope ONE works out. But, I'm saying you aren't thinking it through to make the position you've made that we needed something other than we took because we needed exactly what we took.

[Prosperity]

Our db depth already sucks how bad would it have been without Carlos Rogers?

[MRMADD]

The next -- and every -- person who says we drafted two fullbacks when neither guy played fullback in college and neither guy projects to play fullback in the pros gets banned for sheer idiocy.

Art, you'd make a terrible football coach. When backed up to your own end zone on fourth and 20, punt. If the Skins call 'em fullbacks, the guy is more than justified to call them fullbacks.

In poker, the best way to lose money is to keep playing bad hands. You got a bad hand here. They're fullbacks. No one calls Cooley a fullback because... the Skins don't call him a fullback.

Your real problem, of course, is you get real prickly when anyone points out the foibles of the front office. I mean, why draft FULLBACK Manuel White when Chris Canty, a guy from their own backyard that they should know well and plays a position of crying need, is still on the board? Not a great use of late round picks, IMO.

You still in the business of banning guys for disagreeing with you or touching one of your sacred cows (like Vinny)?

[MRMADD]

But, I'm saying you aren't thinking it through to make the position you've made that we needed something other than we took because we needed exactly what we took.

Art, Art, Art. This thread is not your finest hour. Going into the draft, needs: DE, DB, WR, QB, DT, LB, RB/HB, OG, TE, S

Carlos Rogers, DB -- check.

Jason Campbell, QB -- check.

Manuel White, FB -- no.

Robert McCune, LB -- no.

Jared Newberry, LB -- no.

Nemo Broughton, FB -- no.

So now you see: we didn't take what we needed. We took what the FO misguidedly thought were the best players available. I'm a big fan of BPA because it keeps you from reaching down and overpaying for "need" player (like Campbell) who would be available later. In this case, however, the FO's poor scouting means that these four guys aren't "needs" and weren't the BPAs. Oh well. Late round picks are always a crapshoot.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

All I know is N. Broughton should a tremendous amount of potential during the preseason... I really would love to see him incorporated atleast on special teams.