Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Matt Elam
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Matts4313


Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 37951
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
TVScout wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Can Elam play NT or play on the o-line? If the answer is "no", then we have no reason to pick him in the 1st or 2nd round. As talented as he is, a DB will not make the men in front of him better. D-linemen make DBs better, but DBs don't, and never will, make d-linemen better.


Not entirely accurate because of the coverage sack. I remember 1996 when Haley was out, Sanders was in and we had the #2 defense that year. Admittedly Elam is no Sanders but when you compare the revolving door at safety to what we could get in the draft...............


First, you realize that you just compared a college Safety to a HOF CB, right? Not only did you compare two players on totally different talent levels, but totally different positions. Second, there's no such thing as a coverage sack. I don't buy it and never will. That's NEVER a valid reason to take a Safety over a d-lineman. Ever. The fact remains that a Safety will not make the players around him better. D-linemen will. And when you can't consistently stop the run because your linemen are getting barreled over, a Safety is not going to fix that problem. All that does is allow an offense to shred your secondary because you have fewer men in coverage.


All though I agree with the premise, there most certaintily have been safeties who raise the play of the entire defense.

Dawkins
Woodson
Lynch
Sanders, bob

Weddle
Polamalu
Reed


Have all proven this. When they miss time, there is a noticible decline in the entire defense.
_________________

plan9misfit wrote:

If we're able to go 11-5 or better, then Garrett and his staff deserve to be coaches of the damned decade.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20669
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Matts4313 wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
TVScout wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Can Elam play NT or play on the o-line? If the answer is "no", then we have no reason to pick him in the 1st or 2nd round. As talented as he is, a DB will not make the men in front of him better. D-linemen make DBs better, but DBs don't, and never will, make d-linemen better.


Not entirely accurate because of the coverage sack. I remember 1996 when Haley was out, Sanders was in and we had the #2 defense that year. Admittedly Elam is no Sanders but when you compare the revolving door at safety to what we could get in the draft...............


First, you realize that you just compared a college Safety to a HOF CB, right? Not only did you compare two players on totally different talent levels, but totally different positions. Second, there's no such thing as a coverage sack. I don't buy it and never will. That's NEVER a valid reason to take a Safety over a d-lineman. Ever. The fact remains that a Safety will not make the players around him better. D-linemen will. And when you can't consistently stop the run because your linemen are getting barreled over, a Safety is not going to fix that problem. All that does is allow an offense to shred your secondary because you have fewer men in coverage.


All though I agree with the premise, there most certaintily have been safeties who raise the play of the entire defense.

Dawkins
Woodson
Lynch
Sanders, bob

Weddle
Polamalu
Reed


Have all proven this. When they miss time, there is a noticible decline in the entire defense.


True, but you understand the premise. It's better to build from the inside out rather than from the outside in. Much like building a home, you need a great foundation and solid walls before adding the expensive furniture.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TVScout


Joined: 05 May 2009
Posts: 1623
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't pick for need. Pick for effect. The first round rated DLs in this draft don't fit the system. Players like Hankins and Williams will fail here because they can't penetrate. Elam would do much more for us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Matts4313


Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 37951
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TVScout wrote:
Don't pick for need. Pick for effect. The first round rated DLs in this draft don't fit the system. Players like Hankins and Williams will fail here because they can't penetrate. Elam would do much more for us.


We need to pick BPA within the context of a weaker position of our team.

Unfortunately, we have a lot of positions that can be upgraded. As I mentioned in the other thread, I would be happy with the BPA at any of the following:

1 - Need Positions - OG, RT, NT
2 - Upgrade Positions - S, DE, C, OLB*
_________________

plan9misfit wrote:

If we're able to go 11-5 or better, then Garrett and his staff deserve to be coaches of the damned decade.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20669
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TVScout wrote:
Don't pick for need. Pick for effect. The first round rated DLs in this draft don't fit the system. Players like Hankins and Williams will fail here because they can't penetrate. Elam would do much more for us.


I pick for talent. Jonathan Jenkins, Sheldon Richardson, Chance Warmack, and Barrett Jones are all more talented. I'd take any of them over a Safety.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
htfryar


Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 10771
Location: Hot Springs, Arkansas
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
TVScout wrote:
Don't pick for need. Pick for effect. The first round rated DLs in this draft don't fit the system. Players like Hankins and Williams will fail here because they can't penetrate. Elam would do much more for us.


I pick for talent. Jonathan Jenkins, Sheldon Richardson, Chance Warmack, and Barrett Jones are all more talented. I'd take any of them over a Safety.


Wow, twice in 1 day I am agreeing with Plan. What is the world coming to?

Yes, it would be nice to have a quality Safety that can actually make open field tackles and cover people. Is that going to fix the horrid offensive line? Nope. Is a Safety going to help with the gaping hole at NT? Not so much. We need to fix what is desperately needed before we start making luxury picks.
_________________


“Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should both be changed regularly, and for the same reason.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20669
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

htfryar wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
TVScout wrote:
Don't pick for need. Pick for effect. The first round rated DLs in this draft don't fit the system. Players like Hankins and Williams will fail here because they can't penetrate. Elam would do much more for us.


I pick for talent. Jonathan Jenkins, Sheldon Richardson, Chance Warmack, and Barrett Jones are all more talented. I'd take any of them over a Safety.


Wow, twice in 1 day I am agreeing with Plan. What is the world coming to?

Yes, it would be nice to have a quality Safety that can actually make open field tackles and cover people. Is that going to fix the horrid offensive line? Nope. Is a Safety going to help with the gaping hole at NT? Not so much. We need to fix what is desperately needed before we start making luxury picks.


Come on, ht. You know that we agree on a lot more than that, especially when it comes to the draft.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
htfryar


Joined: 14 Feb 2005
Posts: 10771
Location: Hot Springs, Arkansas
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
htfryar wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
TVScout wrote:
Don't pick for need. Pick for effect. The first round rated DLs in this draft don't fit the system. Players like Hankins and Williams will fail here because they can't penetrate. Elam would do much more for us.


I pick for talent. Jonathan Jenkins, Sheldon Richardson, Chance Warmack, and Barrett Jones are all more talented. I'd take any of them over a Safety.


Wow, twice in 1 day I am agreeing with Plan. What is the world coming to?

Yes, it would be nice to have a quality Safety that can actually make open field tackles and cover people. Is that going to fix the horrid offensive line? Nope. Is a Safety going to help with the gaping hole at NT? Not so much. We need to fix what is desperately needed before we start making luxury picks.


Come on, ht. You know that we agree on a lot more than that, especially when it comes to the draft.


The draft is 1 thing you and I usually do agree on. I think a team should address the trenches early and often.
_________________


“Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should both be changed regularly, and for the same reason.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Nextyearfordaboyz


Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 17256
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The more I think about it, the more impossible it is to justify taking a safety in round 1. And that stings, because pretty much every year I want to land a stud safety. Unfortunately our team is not in the position to afford that luxury. We need some linemen on both sides of the ball. Bad.

Considering that linemen seem to be a very solid group in this draft, I can only see two justifications for not coming out of rounds 1 and 2 with an OL and a DL (I'm not saying these scenarios are great, just that I could understand)

1) A pass rusher is far and away the best player on the board (perhaps Jarvis Jones in round 1 or Ansah in round 2)

2) We fall in love with a quarterback. If this happens, I really hope it's not a Jerry Jones driven thing. I hope the scouts fell in love with one of the guys, and convinced the brass to take him given the opportunity.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Matts4313


Joined: 08 Dec 2004
Posts: 37951
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of 12
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Although I agree, I am just playing devils advocate. Here is some food for thought-

Last year Jerry said if we had not traded for mo cla, we would have drafted brockers and Wagner. Both appear to be studs. That, along with our last couple drafts tell me that we have become much better at finding early round talent.

If they draft a safety and are convinced he is the bpa - would you be upset?
_________________

plan9misfit wrote:

If we're able to go 11-5 or better, then Garrett and his staff deserve to be coaches of the damned decade.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
canadaluvsdalla


Joined: 19 Jan 2011
Posts: 3388
Location: Travel-er
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The only DL guy I'll take in the first round is John Jenkins.

And I would have to agree with matt. I was just thinking about that pretty much the whole season. Either way we would have hit the jackpot. That's a really good sign in our drafting skills lately. I don't know what happned but ever since that 2009 Draft it propelled this team into the top 5 scouting departments in the league the past 2 or 3 years.
_________________

Jason Garrett wrote:
It's not about them, it's about us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
plan9misfit


FF Fanatic
Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 20669
Location: RIP: B2TB, T14, & S.A. We miss you.
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Matts4313 wrote:
Although I agree, I am just playing devils advocate. Here is some food for thought-

Last year Jerry said if we had not traded for mo cla, we would have drafted brockers and Wagner. Both appear to be studs. That, along with our last couple drafts tell me that we have become much better at finding early round talent.

If they draft a safety and are convinced he is the bpa - would you be upset?


Would I be upset? It would depend on how the rest of the draft goes. If we ignore o-line and d-line until rounds 4-6, yes, I'd be pissed. But if we address them in rounds 2 and 3 and pull some quality linemen in those two rounds, then I'd be ok with the selection.
_________________

Co-Founder: DCRA - No McQuistan, No Super Bowl
Northland wrote:
If mediocrity is your SuperBowl then Garrett is your Lombardi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nextyearfordaboyz


Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 17256
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Matts4313 wrote:
Although I agree, I am just playing devils advocate. Here is some food for thought-

Last year Jerry said if we had not traded for mo cla, we would have drafted brockers and Wagner. Both appear to be studs. That, along with our last couple drafts tell me that we have become much better at finding early round talent.

If they draft a safety and are convinced he is the bpa - would you be upset?


If it was clear BPA, I don't think you could argue it. But if you have 2 very similarly rated players, it's time to address the trenches.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
canadaluvsdalla


Joined: 19 Jan 2011
Posts: 3388
Location: Travel-er
PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone think Brad Wing Punter from LSU is a possibility? The kind of field position he can give our defence would be great. Maybe grab him 5th or 6th ?
_________________

Jason Garrett wrote:
It's not about them, it's about us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TVScout


Joined: 05 May 2009
Posts: 1623
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
TVScout wrote:
Don't pick for need. Pick for effect. The first round rated DLs in this draft don't fit the system. Players like Hankins and Williams will fail here because they can't penetrate. Elam would do much more for us.


I pick for talent. Jonathan Jenkins, Sheldon Richardson, Chance Warmack, and Barrett Jones are all more talented. I'd take any of them over a Safety.


Warmack and Jones I will agree with. But....... Jonathan Jenkins can't penetrate and wears down because he is too fat. Richardson was rated the #1 DT prospect coming out of high school but has had only one good season in college and is a candidate as a "heavy pocket" bust. Go on take the money and run...........

What happens if Chance and Barret are gone when we are up?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group