Cowboys FA news/rumors

[Ekspozed]

Burleson is a decent vet, but wasn't he injured majority of last year, and various times throughout his career? 1 year vet min.

DeCoud is interesting. Solid starter who had a down year with seemingly not much interest. Would not cost much, I think... If they aren't as high on S in the 1st this year, then picking him up would allow them to go d-front 7 without them relying on Heath, again... LOL

 

[UK Cowboy]

Burleson is a decent vet, but wasn't he injured majority of last year, and various times throughout his career? 1 year vet min.

DeCoud is interesting. Solid starter who had a down year with seemingly not much interest. Would not cost much, I think... If they aren't as high on S in the 1st this year, then picking him up would allow them to go d-front 7 without them relying on Heath, again... LOL

''relying on Heath''

 

[jarntt]

I was hoping we'd go after Chris Clemmons, but Decoud would still be a solid add. I think Burleson would be a decent depth move as well. Could still go S early, as well as WR later on, but those guys would contribute for sure

I really don't want any part of Burleson. I like our starters and I think Beasley is a great slot receiver. He is only a slot receiver, but thats fine unless we get an injury. I just don't see the need to have him take snaps from our other guys right now. I like Harris as a #4 and obviously he'll be active on game day because of STs. So would Burleson even make the game day roster? If we are going to have 5 WRs active on game day, the #5 guy needs to play STs. I'd rather have a young kid. I'm even OK drafting a WR as long as it isn't too early and we always seem to bring in an UDFA WR that the team likes.

 

[UK Cowboy]

I really don't want any part of Burleson. I like our starters and I think Beasley is a great slot receiver. He is only a slot receiver, but thats fine unless we get an injury. I just don't see the need to have him take snaps from our other guys right now. I like Harris as a #4 and obviously he'll be active on game day because of STs. So would Burleson even make the game day roster? If we are going to have 5 WRs active on game day, the #5 guy needs to play STs. I'd rather have a young kid. I'm even OK drafting a WR as long as it isn't too early and we always seem to bring in an UDFA WR that the team likes.

It really depends on how sold you are on Beasley and Harris. They are basically ignored by defenses because of the weapons the Cowboys have. One injury to Dez changes all that. Dez draws doubles every play. Take him out, and teams would lock up Williams with their top corner, put their #2 on Beasley or Harris, double Witten and shut us down big time.

 

[jarntt]

It really depends on how sold you are on Beasley and Harris. They are basically ignored by defenses because of the weapons the Cowboys have. One injury to Dez changes all that. Dez draws doubles every play. Take him out, and teams would lock up Williams with their top corner, put their #2 on Beasley or Harris, double Witten and shut us down big time.

Burleson wouldn't do anything to change that scenario of Dez getting injured hurting our Offense. By the way, Beasely was not ignored by defenses at the end of the year and Harris didn't play enough for them to ignore him. Obviously you think Burleson is a better WR than I do at this point. I just don't see the idea of bringing in an aging vet at this point. Perhaps in the Summer if we don't draft a WR or find any UFDAs that we like. I'd like to get Harris a handful of snaps a game and think he is fine as a #4 if it comes to that.

 

[fordman84]

Catching up on news and sports this morning, throwing in my $.02...want no part of Burleson. I think we already have 4 WR's better than him on this roster, so no use forcing another old vet on the team. Use a late pick on a WR or go the UDFA route again.

Read the Steelers GM saying that "everyone is looking to trade down" in this draft because of the depth. That is a problem in my eyes for two reasons: 1) makes the price Jerry can get for trading down much lower unless there is someone on the board worth taking (in which case we should take him) and 2) makes the asking price for others lower which means Jerry is more likely to pull the trigger to move up if someone is there we want (which makes me wonder why someone else wouldn't take them if they are worth trading up for).

 

[jarntt]

Catching up on news and sports this morning, throwing in my $.02...want no part of Burleson. I think we already have 4 WR's better than him on this roster, so no use forcing another old vet on the team. Use a late pick on a WR or go the UDFA route again.

Read the Steelers GM saying that "everyone is looking to trade down" in this draft because of the depth. That is a problem in my eyes for two reasons: 1) makes the price Jerry can get for trading down much lower unless there is someone on the board worth taking (in which case we should take him) and 2) makes the asking price for others lower which means Jerry is more likely to pull the trigger to move up if someone is there we want (which makes me wonder why someone else wouldn't take them if they are worth trading up for).

I've been saying all year (really the last 3 years) that the best thing that can happen for us is for the QBs to all go before us. I say this for the obvious reason that it means guys I like will drop and the not so obvious reason that I worry that Jerry will take a QB if they drop. BUT,,,the one chance to get a really big return on a trade may be if one of the QBs drops to us and someone wants to trade up to take him.

 

[Manster7588]

I've been saying all year (really the last 3 years) that the best thing that can happen for us is for the QBs to all go before us. I say this for the obvious reason that it means guys I like will drop and the not so obvious reason that I worry that Jerry will take a QB if they drop. BUT,,,the one chance to get a really big return on a trade may be if one of the QBs drops to us and someone wants to trade up to take him.

I keep saying there is no way Jerry takes a QB this year, but I want them all gone before we draft too. Just in case.

 

[tw1st3d]

I look for the Texans to throw a wrench in everyone's draft plans

They take Watkins with their 1st

Johnson (who is aging but still great when he is healthy)
Daniels
Watkins on the other side
Foster coming out of the backfield

enough depth in this draft they can still add a piece to an already stout defense

Hell you don't need a top Qb behind that ( not that I think there is even a top Qb in this draft)

but you could pull a game manager out of the 2nd or 3rd round

 

[UK Cowboy]

Catching up on news and sports this morning, throwing in my $.02...want no part of Burleson. I think we already have 4 WR's better than him on this roster, so no use forcing another old vet on the team. Use a late pick on a WR or go the UDFA route again.

Read the Steelers GM saying that "everyone is looking to trade down" in this draft because of the depth. That is a problem in my eyes for two reasons: 1) makes the price Jerry can get for trading down much lower unless there is someone on the board worth taking (in which case we should take him) and 2) makes the asking price for others lower which means Jerry is more likely to pull the trigger to move up if someone is there we want (which makes me wonder why someone else wouldn't take them if they are worth trading up for).

I think there's an outside chance that it would allow Jerry to actually trade up instead of down. Someone always slides a bit. If that someone is named Watkins, Robinson, Matthews, Lewan or Barr, and the Cowboys could move from 16 to 9-10 for a 3rd(instead of a 2nd), I could see it

 

[PDay8810]

One thing I know about Jerry and the draft.....anything is possible

 

[cowboycolors]

I want Jerry to stay put and let the draft come to him no using of picks 1-4 this year in trade or next years #1 however everything else should be in play including players to trade.


JMHO

 

[snookdad]

I look for the Texans to throw a wrench in everyone's draft plans

They take Watkins with their 1st

Johnson (who is aging but still great when he is healthy)
Daniels
Watkins on the other side
Foster coming out of the backfield

enough depth in this draft they can still add a piece to an already stout defense

Hell you don't need a top Qb behind that ( not that I think there is even a top Qb in this draft)

but you could pull a game manager out of the 2nd or 3rd round

No way The Texans take Watkins they have way to many need. It's either QB, LB, or DL someone they can pair with JJ Watt. If the Texans Take Watkins I will refer to you as King Twist for the entire upcoming season due to your amazing football knowledge. They took a wr in the 1st year and Andre is still very productive; I can't see it.

 

[jarntt]

No way The Texans take Watkins they have way to many need. It's either QB, LB, or DL someone they can pair with JJ Watt. If the Texans Take Watkins I will refer to you as King Twist for the entire upcoming season due to your amazing football knowledge. They took a wr in the 1st year and Andre is still very productive; I can't see it.

Johnson is getting older and they have been looking for someone to play next to him for a long time. I don't think they will take Watkins, but wouldn't be shocked if they did (I wouldn't want them to if I were a Hou fan). They took Hopkins early last year and he was disappointing, but he was also hurt. Wonder how they feel about him. If they think it was a wasted pick that could push them toward Watkins

 

[UK Cowboy]

If I'm the Texans, I'm trading down. Clowney is a 4-3 end. They can get a similar QB to Bortles at the start of the 2nd round. Trade down 3-4 spots, still get Watkins, Mack or Barr, and come away with 3 starters in the 1st two rounds

 

[Manster7588]

If I'm the Texans, I'm trading down. Clowney is a 4-3 end. They can get a similar QB to Bortles at the start of the 2nd round. Trade down 3-4 spots, still get Watkins, Mack or Barr, and come away with 3 starters in the 1st two rounds

Problem is they need to find a trade partner.

 

[UK Cowboy]

Problem is they need to find a trade partner.

I would think Cleveland, if they really wanted Bortles. They have 3 picks in the top 40, and they sure as heck need a QB. If I were Cleveland, I'd try and pair up Watkins with their other stud WR, and then take a QB with their next pick. However with Jax picking at 3, if there's a QB they like, they'd have to trade with either Houston or St Louis to get him

 

[snookdad]

I'm not trying to start no crap but I get criticized a lot for loving Dez ppl look to educate me and other who share my opinion about value by position. It's been said in this Forum QB, LT, DT and then WR. Iv'e said yeah I get it but, that's not the rule in all cases. Know Everyone is in love with Watkins but would take Tyron Smith over Calvin Johnson omg I don't get it lol. Houston needs a franchise qb. Who going to throw to Watkins if you take him? Before you answer this question do a quick breakdown of the history of when and where you draft your qb and the measure of success he's expected to have. Generally drafting a qb after the 1st round has been a crap shoot. Of course they're some success stories; the failures far out way the successes though. I generally speaking think you need to get that qb in the 1st round and early in the 1st round.

If there's no franchise qb in the first round would then consider Watkins but likely take Clowney and try and dominate with he and Watt. When you eave elite level players you tailor your scheme to fit their talent not the other way round Imo.

 

[jarntt]

I'm not trying to start no crap but I get criticized a lot for loving Dez ppl look to educate me and other who share my opinion about value by position. It's been said in this Forum QB, LT, DT and then WR. Iv'e said yeah I get it but, that's not the rule in all cases. Know Everyone is in love with Watkins but would take Tyron Smith over Calvin Johnson omg I don't get it lol. Houston needs a franchise qb. Who going to throw to Watkins if you take him? Before you answer this question do a quick breakdown of the history of when and where you draft your qb and the measure of success he's expected to have. Generally drafting a qb after the 1st round has been a crap shoot. Of course they're some success stories; the failures far out way the successes though. I generally speaking think you need to get that qb in the 1st round and early in the 1st round.

If there's no franchise qb in the first round would then consider Watkins but likely take Clowney and try and dominate with he and Watt. When you eave elite level players you tailor your scheme to fit their talent not the other way round Imo.

Yeah, if you read enough and don't pay careful attention to the particular debate at hand you will find a lot of contradictions on here by everyone. For example, I was the one saying anyone that thinks having T Smith (who I absolutely love and wanted when we took him) over Calvin is better should literally have their heads examined. I think it is crazy to even put them in the same discussion. Doesn't mean I don't value LT or like T SMith, it's just that Calvin may go down as a top 5 player of all time. Then I turn around and rank Watkins #4 in this draft behind 2 OL. So it could seem inconsitent, but it really isn't. I think the reason is that no two players are alike (even if they share the same position) and there are different ways to skin a cat.

For me, there is no way in Hell WR is a top 4 position. But, if you don't have a good QB you may need a great WR. So it all comes down to team makeup. Like I said the other day, there have been teams with great QBs and horrible QBs that have won a SB and I'm sure you could do that for every position and aspect of the game. It is easier to win a SB with a great WR, but certainly not necessary. I think any team that passes on a franchise QB deserves to suck. It is the one position that is more indicaive of success or failure than any other. But, that doesn't mean you should take a QB at #1 UNLESS you truly feel that player is a franchise QB. Taking him in thre first doesn't make him a good QB. If they think all of these QBs are 3rd round talents, then why in the world would they take one of them at #1 overall...

 

[tw1st3d]

For example, I was the one saying anyone that thinks having T Smith (who I absolutely love and wanted when we took him) over Calvin is better should literally have their heads examined..

I think with a statement like like you are talking out of your ass and being a dick.

I remember when Johnson was drafted...... I don't remember you or anyone else on the Cowboys board calling for him. Including myself. I don't think I remember anyone even hinting at him.

Now that he has become all he is .... that hindsight bullshit

Now with Watkins ... I've never said it's realistic. I just think the kid is special. Thing is I'm not calling him something special AFTER he's in the league. I think he is special coming into the draft.


And for the who is going to throw him the ball comment

I'm telling you right now ... Not one Qb being talked about in the 1st round is worth a fuck. So my opinion is grabbing a Qb in this draft just to say you grabbed one in the first is flat fucking stupid and SHOULD get a GM fired.