++ UPDATE: AP requests a trade to the Cowboys - Reinstated

[Hawkfin 32]

That was definitely an exception to the rule case there... But, the Colts also had a Peyton Manning in his prime. Romo is good, but he's not Manning.

Romo is not remotly close to Brady either..... I hate your comparison to NE and using them as an example for no need for a RB. They also have no need for a superstar WR. You don't have a coach like Bill B. either or a Brady or even their def. I would put Blount/Vareen far above McFadden too, even with your Oline.

 

This is why you need a good runner. Dallas does not have a GREAT QB & Oline. (2 of 3 like you said) They had a great line and RB, with a game manager at QB.

 

And when I say game manager I mean: He was very productive last year because he took a step back and let the running game take over. He did not make mistakes for a change.

 

So now all you have is a great line really and a QB that probably will press again if the running game lacks.

 

And you also have no proof that with the loss of Murray your running game will even be the same?

I think that was his point about "Rebuilding the running game" I wouldn't personally say rebuilding though.

But, finding a special back is not as easy as you make it sound. Plug and play is not true IMO. Maybe in F.F., but there is something to be said for a "goaline" RB that can pound it in.

You could really come to miss what you had in Murray is what I'm saying.

 

J. Randle was used as a decoy kind of player when Def's were unprepared for a run. You can't really think his stat line means anything can you?

He's a scat type back that benifited from being behind a high caliber player in Murray. Low carries = Bigger YPA

 

Forsett has always been a move the chains/pounding RB and deceptively good. And he has always stayed relatively healthy in his career. He actually was just never utilized much or given a real shot. That is why he's flirted with being a starter for so long. And Balt used his recieving to their strength. Bad example IMO.

He's way better then McFadden.

[weepaws 2,461]

Agree there is no proof that the Cowboys running will be the same , worst , or even better .

[weepaws 2,461]

Disagree about Romo , he is better QB than just a game manager . Them titles belong to the Mccown and Bradfords the Foles they are game managers . I would rank Romo play above that . Great no but better than game manager .

[Hawkfin 32]

By the way:
Just off the top of my head here is a list of SB winners and some of the "great" RB's that helped them win it.

Denver - Terrell Davis (If you remember, Elway could never win it by himself, until he finally got a great running game and RB)

Miami - Zonka

Dallas - Emmitt Smith

Chicago - Walter Payton

S.F - R. Craig (And always been a playoff team with Gore)
Rams - M. Faulk

Pitts - J. Bettis

Giants - Bradshaw & Tiki Barber

Balt - J. Lewis & R. Rice

Seattle - M. Lynch

Really the exception to the rule is NE. But, they just use a split back and team aspect for everything they do. And Blount is a endzone pounder.

 

The "trend" that I see is they are RB's that can find the endzone. Power running games, etc. (Murray was that kind of runner)

AP is at an entirely different level of this and probably the best in the league.

 

You also don't see rookies in here often or guy's that are injury prone!

(Brand new RB = starting over in a sense)

 

Romo can't afford that.

 

cheers

 

[Hawkfin 32]

Disagree about Romo , he is better QB than just a game manager . Them titles belong to the Mccown and Bradfords the Foles they are game managers . I would rank Romo play above that . Great no but better than game manager .

No, the McCowns and Bradfords of the world are the bottom dwellers and lucky to even sniff the playoffs.

 

The Romo's, Rivers, Dalton, maybe even Cutlers of the league are the "average to good" game managers that can lead you into the playoffs OR put up decent stats for the year. But, they need a great Runner to take them over the top if that is even enough.

And usually, these are the guy's that cost their team some how with stupid play at some point.

 

Then there is a group above this such as Brady that are the cream of the crop that may not require a great running game. But, at the very least tend to not make big mistakes to hurt their team or have downers.

Romo is NOT in this category. We've seen it year after year. That running game is key for him by far.

 

Maybe your right though - Maybe your running game won't take a step back some how? Find that perfect rookie maybe.

But, I don't buy it with McFadden at the helm. Part of your issues with Murray is that he got hurt and it destroyed ur year. McFadden is a whole new level of this.

[weepaws 2,461]

The Brady's and Mannings have had there bad moments that have cost there teams wins . So again I would rank Romo better then a game manager . And Rivers also. You can have Dalton and Cutler .

[Hawkfin 32]

The Brady's and Mannings have had there bad moments that have cost there teams wins . So again I would rank Romo better then a game manager . And Rivers also. You can have Dalton and Cutler .

Romo has 1 playoff win in his entire long career from what I remember. ONE. And that was against a lowly detroit team who also has never won. And Dallas got some nice calls to help them win it. They also had the great running game that carried them in that win, with Murray who was playing for a big payday all year.

Romo has had Bryant and Witten all these years too. (Very limited playoffs for Romo also)

 

He's right up there with Cutler to me. Probably a little more grounded then Cutler. But still, they have produced the same.

Rivers is in the same boat. He's had LT and still unable to do much.

 

These guy's find a way to lose at some point! They are in my book the true definition of a game manager. R. Wilson gets labeled as such, but he's a leader when it matters the most and he's already done more then all these guy's put together.

 

Rivers and Romo pad their stats. I feel people then go by these stats or how their games are managed to determine what they are.

Wilson doesn't throw much = Game Manager

Romo or Staffard throws for 500 attempts and pads his stats, while throwing 15+ Int's = Stud QB that just hans't won it yet.

 

To me, they are all average to good. Probably even Franchise quality. But, they either are OR "Need to be" game managers. They need a great RB is the point.

Like Romo had last year.

 

Every QB has their bad games. And the reason P. Manning has trouble in the playoff's cause he does in fact make mistakes in those big games. But overall, game to game, especially a guy like Brady they are better and more consistant. They lead their teams to victories, Playoff wins, SB's, etc.

 

Romo did become consistant last year though - But, we'll see how it turns out this year without Murray/upgrade. I have a feeling we see old Romo.

[weepaws 2,461]

I will stand on how I feel , I think both Romo and Rivers are better QBs then just game managers . You can stand on how you feel .

[Cruzer 1,992]

Hawkfin, on 03 Apr 2015 - 12:09 PM, said:

By the way:

Just off the top of my head here is a list of SB winners and some of the "great" RB's that helped them win it.

 

Denver - Terrell Davis (If you remember, Elway could never win it by himself, until he finally got a great running game and RB)

Miami - Zonka

Dallas - Emmitt Smith

Chicago - Walter Payton

S.F - R. Craig (And always been a playoff team with Gore)

Rams - M. Faulk

Pitts - J. Bettis

Giants - Bradshaw & Tiki Barber

Balt - J. Lewis & R. Rice

Seattle - M. Lynch

This is a really stupid comparison - mostly bcoz today's game is nothing like the ones these guys played in. The only example cited that applies is Lynch - and he had the best defense in the league, which goes to support my argument.

 

BTW - you left off Jim Taylor and Elijah Pitts off of the list for the '66 SB.

[Hawkfin 32]

This is a really stupid comparison - mostly bcoz today's game is nothing like the ones these guys played in. The only example cited that applies is Lynch - and he had the best defense in the league, which goes to support my argument.

 

BTW - you left off Jim Taylor and Elijah Pitts off of the list for the '66 SB.

So tell me the year today's game is different and changed? When is your cutoff date for when the game has changed?

To me it seems like last year is your cut-off, since NE is your only and main referance point.

 

You tell me the year when the game changed and I can dig up some valid stats for you. Like I said, I just listed off the top of my head.

And I would say at least 3 of those were relavent anyway.

 

IMO - I think you saying the game has changed is actually "stupid". You still win with a great running game and Def.

Nothing has ever changed about that - EVER.

[Hawkfin 32]

I will stand on how I feel , I think both Romo and Rivers are better QBs then just game managers . You can stand on how you feel .

Fair enough - No problem. I see your point too.

 

Statistically speaking, you are more right and that they are better then game managers. I guess my point was that they "should be" more of a game manager

(Because I feel that's what they are) and that's how Romo did very well doing last year more so then any other year.

 

And also, They would be on the top end of "my game manager list" - I realize Rivers/Romo are better then Cutler/Dalton. But, they all have accomplished roughly the same.

 

Anyway, it's all good. Just fun debate.

[sirensong 111]

J. Randle was used as a decoy kind of player when Def's were unprepared for a run. You can't really think his stat line means anything can you?

He's a scat type back that benifited from being behind a high caliber player in Murray. Low carries = Bigger YPA

 

 

i'm going to ignore the romo stuff, because that has been covered in detail in other places. yes, romo has only won 2 playoff games. but he has always been saddled with a deeply flawed roster, who wouldn't have even made it to the playoffs had romo not dragged them there. as opposed to, say, a guy with a much higher draft pedigree, who is about to be the highest paid player in NFL history, despite being blessed with a dominant defense and a top-notch running game his entire career.

 

but this particular bit should be a sign to you of how little you know about what is going on with the cowboys. first, randle is not a scatback in any way, shape, or form. if you can't watch his tape, go read his scouting reports.

 

second, ~90% of his snaps this season resulted in rushing attempts. because he's a poor pass protector, everyone knew that when randle was on the field, he was going to get the ball. consequently, he was routinely running into stacked boxes and run blitzes.

 

you're not entirely wrong--there's no way that randle would put up 7ypc as the lead back. but you're just not in command of the facts here. good analysis can't come out of a bad knowledge base, so this should be an indicator to you that maybe you don't know enough to be making these kinds of statements.

[Cruzer 1,992]

So tell me the year today's game is different and changed? When is your cutoff date for when the game has changed?

To me it seems like last year is your cut-off, since NE is your only and main referance point.

 

You tell me the year when the game changed and I can dig up some valid stats for you. Like I said, I just listed off the top of my head.

And I would say at least 3 of those were relavent anyway.

 

IMO - I think you saying the game has changed is actually "stupid". You still win with a great running game and Def.

Nothing has ever changed about that - EVER.

I will say it again - the past 10 SB champs are: NE, SEA, BALT, NYG, GB, NO, PIT, NYG, IND and PIT. Name me which one of these teams had the league's leader rusher...? Name me the team who won bcoz of their running game...? I'll save you the effort - there isn't one. The closest anyone came was Seattle and Baltimore with Lynch and Rice. But you, me and the entire football watching world knows those teams won bcoz of their defenses first, the systematic efficiency of their qb second and lastly bcoz of a solid consistent running game.

 

The past 10 rusher leaders are: Murray, McCoy, AP, MJD, Foster, AP, L. Tomlinson, L. Tomlinson, S. Alexander, C. Martin.... Of this group only Alexander made it to a SB (lost) and LT made it to a Championship game once.

 

Murray finally has 1 full season out of 3 and you people want to shell out $8m a year for somebody who is just as likely to never replicate that performance again. I'll gladly take my chances in saying we will be fine.

[sirensong 111]

Murray finally has 1 full season out of 3 and you people want to shell out $8m a year for somebody who is just as likely to never replicate that performance again. I'll gladly take my chances in saying we will be fine.

 

1 out of 4, actually, and only 2 full seasons since graduating high school.

[weepaws 2,461]

Fair enough - No problem. I see your point too.

 

Statistically speaking, you are more right and that they are better then game managers. I guess my point was that they "should be" more of a game manager

(Because I feel that's what they are) and that's how Romo did very well doing last year more so then any other year.

 

And also, They would be on the top end of "my game manager list" - I realize Rivers/Romo are better then Cutler/Dalton. But, they all have accomplished roughly the same.

 

Anyway, it's all good. Just fun debate.

Amen Brother I agree . Thanks for the fun debate

[Hawkfin 32]

First,

I never said I would shell out money for Murray. Honestly, I don't care about the cowboys. What I've been saying is, Cowboys will be taking a hit in their running game without him IMO. And I was an advocate for you guy's getting AP who is FAR AND WAY better then Murray anyway. AP could take you to a whole new level in your run game.

 

Second, again you are basing all SB winners and their RB on 1 fact alone. "That they had to lead the league in rushing the same year"

I could care less about "leading the league"

 

What I care about is, Did all those teams have a power running game and very dominate running game throughout the year OR proven to have it the year before? The answer to that is yes. Those SB winners (and most all the SB losers too) all had very dominate running games and Def.

 

And I listed the backs for Sea, Balt, NYG twice, Pitts.... Yet you only gave me credit for 1 (Lynch) and called them all ancient and a different age.
Also, I'm not sure but didn't Colts have E. James too who lead the league at one point.

NE, Colts, GB, N.O. also have "stud QB's" and far better then Romo.

 

 

Third point: You sure don't see any rookie backs or even 1-3 year guy's in those SB winners do you?

 

I think we agree on the Def wins championships part. That's really a mute point. All the more reason to draft Def with your 1st and 2nd round pick instead of drafting a rookie RB.

 

P.S. - Every one of those leading rushers (accept Jones Drew) pretty much have made a run in the playoffs at one time or another. A lot of times deep into the playoff's and for multiple years even.

[Hawkfin 32]

At Sirensong:

I'm going to ignore your entire post actually....

All you did was go into personal attacks and question my football knowledge. You gave me nothing for facts nor do I even care to waist anymore time with the dribble you spewed.
Sure, I don't follow Dallas as a team like maybe you guy's. But, I'm a football fan. I watch it just like you. You don't have a magic bubble that your so special you know it all. Your not a scout or in the NFL. You are like me. You have your views and I have mine.

 

Randle sucks. I have watched Randle enough to know about him. Scatback might be the wrong term, but he's no quality starter. He's a change of pace back and nothing ever more IMO.

Like I said, from what I've seen teams don't respect him and they surely don't stack the fing box. Joke.

 

He is no Murray and you will be in deeper problems then McFadden if that's who your relying on. Randle struggled to beat out your #3 for the last 2 years.

He's one more off field problem away from being cut.

Drill on

[ralphster 274]

I always thought Ryan Williams could have been something special if he'd have stayed healthy. If there truly is no smoke for an AP trade fire then perhaps Dallas is comfortable using RW/Randle/McInjury in a tandem RBBC to get it done. Great speculative sleeper pick though imo. Regardless, if the boys run game isn't at least 85% or so of what they had last year this year will be painful (11-5 or so, bounced from playoffs again) and everyone will question what would have happened IF they only would have kept Murray...

 

Then again, if Jerrah makes the AP deal I'd put Dallas at or near the top of league challengers to the SEA/NE logjam.

[sirensong 111]

At Sirensong:

 

I'm going to ignore your entire post actually....

 

All you did was go into personal attacks and question my football knowledge.

 

 

telling you that you lack pertinent information is not a personal attack. i don't make comments about SEA personnel decisions, because i'm aware of the fact that i lack detailed info on that team. all i know is what i see in games and come across on ESPN, which doesn't give enough context to develop an informed opinion.

 

what you said was wrong. randle did not benefit from softer defenses. it was exactly the opposite--because he sucks in pass pro, defenses knew that he was likely to get the ball whenever he came into the game. regarding football terminology, a scatback is a small, nimble runner who uses short-area quickness and change of direction in order to create running lanes. randle isn't that kind of runner at all--he's an upright slasher who hits the hole and then makes people miss on the second level.

 

no one in the thread is saying that randle is a viable starter--he may not even make the team this season. most DAL fans are quite comfortable with the idea of cutting him. the argument is that if the offensive line could make randle look good, then they probably had a lot to do with murray's success, also. an OL that can make a 5th rounder look that good can probably make a more talented runner--like the 5-6 guys DAL is currently evaluating--look pretty good also.

 

nor is DAL relying on DMC, which you would also know if you were more informed about the team. he was brought in to compete for 3rd down back, and his contract is structured for the possibility that he might not even make the roster (only $200K guaranteed, with the bulk in time and performance incentives).

 

i certainly don't know it all, but i know more about DAL personnel than you do. if i were making wild claims about which players SEA should keep, based on mistaken assumptions about those players, then you would quite rightly call me out on not knowing enough about the situation.

 

and it would be unreasonable of me to get my feelers hurt, because you would be correct.

[sirensong 111]

I always thought Ryan Williams could have been something special if he'd have stayed healthy. If there truly is no smoke for an AP trade fire then perhaps Dallas is comfortable using RW/Randle/McInjury in a tandem RBBC to get it done. Great speculative sleeper pick though imo. Regardless, if the boys run game isn't at least 85% or so of what they had last year this year will be painful (11-5 or so, bounced from playoffs again) and everyone will question what would have happened IF they only would have kept Murray...

 

Then again, if Jerrah makes the AP deal I'd put Dallas at or near the top of league challengers to the SEA/NE logjam.

 

this is highly unlikely. murray's departure meant that drafting a RB on day 1 or 2 is almost inevitable. the coaching staff likes williams a lot, and barring injury, he will probably bump randle out this preseason. dunbar is in a make-or-break season. he's got talent, but he hasn't been able to break out. amusingly, DMC's cap hit (if he makes the team) will be ~$400K less than dunbar's. so this might be a money move.

 

IMO, the most likely scenario will be williams/DMC/high pick. if they somehow came away with gurley (which is unlikely), williams would probably be the bridge while gurley finishes his knee rehab. a more likely situation is a DAL draft move targeting one of the 2nd-round talents, like ajayi or coleman.

[Hawkfin 32]

Fair enough,

 

I never meant to say I knew Dallas situation and an expert on what you guy's should do. And your right, you know more about your team. I also said it was a poor choice of words calling him a scat back. You've proven your point on that and I know what a scat back is.

I just meant he's a change of pace back that will never make it as a full time starter. In my mind I labeled him as a scat back for that reason of him not being able to handle a huge work load or ever be a back close to Murray caliber. Scat back was bad wording though.
Again, that's MY views from what I've seen of him and some of the times he got a start.

 

But, I still don't agree with you that Def's knew he was running just because it wasn't 3rd down. I felt teams just thought as him as a breather for Murray and most likely they will be passing on this down instead. I never saw stacked boxes, etc.

Not saying I'm right about that, just what I thought I saw.

When your only getting 80 carries or whatever for the year, and you happen to break off a few big ones, your overall YPA look a whole lot better and down right misleading. It's a whole lot different situation being the prime back.

 

But, the entire point (And you proved it) was that he might not even make the team. To me that clearly means he's not good enough. And if you say McFadden is also on the bubble or maybe he's not meant to start then WHO IS?

You've missed all the other E-mails where we've talked about Dallas really should work on there Def early in the draft. And even your fellow Dallas fans talked about how important it is to upgrade the Def. I've already talked about the rookie RB thing also if you read all my post leading up to the one you commented on.

 

But, I do agree your line is very good. I do agree they helped Murray succeed and might help any back you bring in. But again, I don't see anything on your roster close to the quality of Murray that Dallas gave up. IMO.

 

Anyway, I didn't mean to try and say I was an expert or even know Dallas situation. But, what Ralphster just said I completely agree with. I see Dallas as weaker now. And I was just trying to give my "outside .02" to advocate getting AP as that would be a real nice option for you guy's and an upgrade over Murray even. Plus then you can upgrade your Def in the draft to get younger and better there.

 

GL

[sirensong 111]

fair points. for me, it boils down to this:

 

rookie RB (some dropoff) + hardy (huge gain)

 

...is preferable to...

 

rookie DLman (no gain) + murray (no gain).

 

rookie DLmen suck--unless drafted in the top 10, they usually hurt the team for the first couple of years. romo only has 3 years left. rookie RBs, however, can come in and succeed right away. there's no way in hell that murray was going to put up 1800+ again, even if he managed to stay healthy. and he doesn't play defense--DAL should have lost the DET game, and they weren't going to keep rodgers out of the end zone even had dez scored. they just didn't have the defense to compete.

 

pending the draft results, there's a very good chance that DAL will be a much more complete team. that just wasn't going to happen had they kept murray and drafted defenders who probably wouldn't have even been starters.

[cbfalcon 824]

I haven't researched who is still out there in free agency, but I assume there are no more defensive difference makers to be signed by Dallas. So simplified:

 

If Dallas doesn't land Peterson, they are very likely to draft a RB in the 1st. If they do get Peterson, I assume they go defense in the 1st.

 

Option A: McFadden and a rookie at RB. No 1st round defensive upgrade.

 

Option B: Peterson and McFadden at RB. A 1st Rounder joins the defense.

 

Maybe it's just me, but I feel option A makes the offense AND the defense better. But that's just me.

[sirensong 111]

i did a post over on bloggingtheboys, exploring the idea that given the current situation, the best draft strategy may be to target the player with the greatest potential for impact over the next 2 seasons. whereas CB or DE would probably be the best choice from an overall teambuilding standpoint, i concluded pretty much what you did--an RB is going to have the greatest team-wide impact, followed by a playmaking 3-technique (even if he is inconsistent against the run).

 

DAL can't afford to reach for need, so i ultimately argued that if G/G or a penetrating 3-tech isn't available at 27, they should trade down while keeping the same priorities.

[Hawkfin 32]

I haven't researched who is still out there in free agency, but I assume there are no more defensive difference makers to be signed by Dallas. So simplified:

 

If Dallas doesn't land Peterson, they are very likely to draft a RB in the 1st. If they do get Peterson, I assume they go defense in the 1st.

 

Option A: McFadden and a rookie at RB. No 1st round defensive upgrade.

 

Option B: Peterson and McFadden at RB. A 1st Rounder joins the defense.

 

Maybe it's just me, but I feel option A makes the offense AND the defense better. But that's just me.

I guess that's where I'm much different. I personally like option B for you guy's. By a landslide even!

 

Your giving a whole lot of credit for a rookie back plugging right in and being just as good as Murray or maybe even better. Yet, no credit for say a top tier CB or something you draft on Def to also plug right in? I undestand the differances of RB being easier, but at some point you need to get young stud rookie Def players also. The odds might not be as good, but it's even more important that you get it.

 

But, also to me you really have to consider the dynamics AP would bring who would lead your entire team and also keeps oposing offense's of the field.

 

I guess I also really like the idea of spending my first 2 or more picks on Def rather then a RB. Rebuilding the def in the draft concept.

 

Also, when is the last time a 1-3 year Rookie RB won or even was in a SB?

Lets flip the script on the poster who was saying when was the last time a league leading rushing went to the SB?

Because I also do agee with you that Romo is in that 1-3 year window.

[Cruzer 1,992]

If Dallas doesn't land Peterson, they are very likely to draft a RB in the 1st. If they do get Peterson, I assume they go defense in the 1st.

 

Option A: McFadden and a rookie at RB. No 1st round defensive upgrade.

 

Option B: Peterson and McFadden at RB. A 1st Rounder joins the defense.

Option A, by a mile.

 

Peterson is great, agreed. But he's an over priced, over valued short term move. Why does everyone insist on thinking short term, just bcoz Romo is almost done? That's as stupid as thinking Dallas can't win w/out Murray.... We have the youngest, best damn offensive line in football. We have some youth and building blocks on defense. It is possible to be good and make a run now and still have a plan to be challenging for a title in 7 years too... To give away valuable draft picks and shell out ridiculous millions to a 30 year old Rb is just crazy - and totally unnecessary. By doing this your're basically renting AP at QB type money - just bad business all the way around.

 

In addition to all the considerations for defense and Rb in the draft - we need to start looking at taking a Qb too. If B. Petty is sitting there in the 3rd - I say jump all over his ass.

[weepaws 2,461]

Winning now is the move . That great Oline seven years from now might be broken up , injures could tear that good Oline apart . And in this QB driven league who do they have to take over when Romo does leave . I would go for the gold now .

[ralphster 274]

Count me in the 'window is now' camp for the boys. Thinking about challenging again in 7 years is a paradox - you're occupied with tomorrow and forgetting about today. So many variables 7 years out it makes no sense to consider. Sure always build (and maintain cap room) for the future, stick to your guns on how much you'll spend, cultivate talent from the draft, etc etc

 

Save that you have the roster to win now. To challenge and win big now. Dallas fans have suffered through some pretty bad times over the last 20 years after Jerrah ran off Jimy/Barry. He's learned along the way and with his kid/staff helping reign in his overspending there's never been a better plan/talent in place to make a move.

 

Option B from above makes more sense to me, especially because I don't believe that a rookie RB possesses on average any better chance of making an impact when compared to a rookie CB or DE or LB (of which you need all three). Further I think Peterson is so desperate to get out of MIN that he'll be willing to tear up his contract and make it work for the boys. Right now trade compensation is all that remains to be decided. AP's likely already told Jerrah and Co that he'll do whatever it takes. This just makes too much sense.

 

Taking an RB at 27 is more dicey than taking a top tier CB at that slot imo. You got Hardy to address late season pass rush. Shore up the secondary with your first pick! Why not take a perfectly acceptable RB on day 2 or 3 to complement (read: usurp) McFadden and then ride AP to the Superbowl for the next two years?

[Cruzer 1,992]

All of you "One more player to put us over the top", "One player away" types - it just doesn't work. Name a time when this philosophy has ever worked? The immediate name that comes to mind is Herschel Walker. Minny was "one player away" from "putting them over the top" - 1 piece away from SB parades and rings. How did that turn out? In 1999 Mike Ditka traded away the Saint's entire draft for "one guy" (a running back btw) - how did that turn out? Hell even here at home - back in 1999 Dallas was, in Jerry Jones' mind, "one player away" from making another run at a SB. Aikman was on his last legs and Jerry knew he only had so much time left with him to "win now" (sound familiar, insert Romo's name here). So we traded 2 1st Rounders to Seattle for Joey Galloway. The very 1st game of the next season Galloway tears his ACL - gone for the year. Seattle in turn uses those picks to take Shawn Alexander and Koren Robinson.

 

Unless your 1 guy is a franchise Qb - this type of move never works. It just flat out doesn't.

[ralphster 274]

All of you "One more player to put us over the top", "One player away" types - it just doesn't work. Name a time when this philosophy has ever worked?

 

NE pick up of Revis last year?

[weepaws 2,461]

The Broncos picked up Manning and went to the Super Bowl

[Cruzer 1,992]

NE pick up of Revis last year?

Come on now - Brady already had 3 SBs, prolly should of had at least 1 more. Revis was a great addition but he hardly put the greatest Qb of all time over the top of anything.

[Cruzer 1,992]

The Broncos picked up Manning and went to the Super Bowl

Thank you paws, exactly my point. Manning is a franchise Qb - that's the only time it works. It never, ever works if the player is anything other, especially a RB.

[ralphster 274]

Come on now - Brady already had 3 SBs, prolly should of had at least 1 more. Revis was a great addition but he hardly put the greatest Qb of all time over the top of anything.

 

For the first time last year I drafted Brady in several redraft leagues- your GOAT - lost me 4 of my first 5 games and bounced me from the playoffs. If you're entire argument countering my post above is that Brady was SO GREAT last year that he did not need Revis to get over the top then we're speaking different languages brother. Revis was definitely the piece that got them over the hump last year imo. Anyone saying different is a homer or trying to advance a different agenda.

 

EDIT: Brady didn't bounce me from the playoffs. I started LaFell over Martavis Bryant and lost. Had Brady scored 5 more points I'd have won. Sour grapes on me for sure, but my point still stands.

[Cruzer 1,992]

For the first time last year I drafted Brady in several redraft leagues- your GOAT - lost me 4 of my first 5 games and bounced me from the playoffs. If you're entire argument countering my post above is that Brady was SO GREAT last year that he did not need Revis to get over the top then we're speaking different languages brother. Revis was definitely the piece that got them over the hump last year imo. Anyone saying different is a homer or trying to advance a different agenda.

First and foremost, I don't give a rat's ass about players from a fantasy perspective. Got burned out after 20+ years of playing it... Secondly - Brady has won the AFC East 12 out of the past 14 seasons, the last 6 seasons in a row. Brady has a streak of getting the Pats to the past 4 Conference title games. And every so often he goes along and wins a SB too.

 

Revis is a great player and was a key part to the Pats SB year. But I'd hardly say he put them over the top of anything. Revis needed Brady to get his first SB ring - Brady already had 3 w/out him.

[weepaws 2,461]

Thank you paws, exactly my point. Manning is a franchise Qb - that's the only time it works. It never, ever works if the player is anything other, especially a RB.

And that's the point . Get the stud Rb while you still have the Qb . So get Peterson and make a run for the title . I bet with they the Cowboys where to win the Super Bowl with Peterson they would not complain. Will did again they are Cowboy fans

[Cruzer 1,992]

And that's the point . Get the stud Rb while you still have the Qb . So get Peterson and make a run for the title . I bet with they the Cowboys where to win the Super Bowl with Peterson they would not complain. Will did again they are Cowboy fans

Okay - name me 1 instance, just 1, were going out to get a stud RB has put a team over the top and into the SB?

 

It doesn't work - I cited examples as proof of that. The same things were being said in Minny back in 1989 - they're still waiting for that parade.

[IGotWorms 3,316]

I recall the Colts won the Super Bowl with a sorry defense so I have seen it done . But it's not the norm . I said it last month someone will over pay for Murray and the Eagles did .

The defense played very well in the post season though, for the most part. Freeney was still in his prime and Bob Sanders had an incredible stretch run (one of the few times he wasn't on IR)

[weepaws 2,461]

The defense played very well in the post season though, for the most part. Freeney was still in his prime and Bob Sanders had an incredible stretch run (one of the few times he wasn't on IR)

Those facts of yours are true . But they still had a sorry ranked defense and that answered the question that was asked .

[sirensong 111]

Further I think Peterson is so desperate to get out of MIN that he'll be willing to tear up his contract and make it work for the boys. Right now trade compensation is all that remains to be decided. AP's likely already told Jerrah and Co that he'll do whatever it takes. This just makes too much sense.

 

Taking an RB at 27 is more dicey than taking a top tier CB at that slot imo. You got Hardy to address late season pass rush. Shore up the secondary with your first pick! Why not take a perfectly acceptable RB on day 2 or 3 to complement (read: usurp) McFadden and then ride AP to the Superbowl for the next two years?

 

if AP stays in MIN, he is guaranteed $45M over the next 3 years. stop and think about that number for a minute: forty-five million dollars. that money is his--he gets it even if he is sitting on his couch all season.

 

DAL can't even afford to pay half that, for a guy who would be turning 32 at the end of it. there's no cap room left.

 

forget sports contracts for a moment, and think of that money as personal income. do you know of any human being who would pay twenty-five million dollars out of pocket to work in a different place?