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

Cowboys' 5 and 10 year Draft Rankings
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author 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: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And the rest of the drafts which caused the results to tank? What about those?

Dude, I've been on the soap box yelling at the top of my lungs that Ware was a Jerry pick, yet that isn't the whole thing. Read how the results are measured, Des.
_________________

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
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 24694
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I fail to see what I said somehow disqualifies me as not having read the article when I read both that one and the one upon which all the numbers were accumulated.

Not saying it's an invalid article. It has some merit. But it also skews some perception. Giving credit to teams who drafted well but fail to keep resources. Measuring based on number of starts. Nor do I think anyone placed the full weight of the pro-bowl as the end all to a discussion.

Is the conclusion interesting? Sure. Is it a perfect statistic based on real world results? No.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
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: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I fail to see what I said somehow disqualifies me as not having read the article when I read both that one and the one upon which all the numbers were accumulated.

Not saying it's an invalid article. It has some merit. But it also skews some perception. Giving credit to teams who drafted well but fail to keep resources. Measuring based on number of starts. Nor do I think anyone placed the full weight of the pro-bowl as the end all to a discussion.

Is the conclusion interesting? Sure. Is it a perfect statistic based on real world results? No.


The importance of the article is to show that the Cowboys organization can't continually find talent. Sure, we find them in the 1st or 2nd rounds, but nothing is sustained through an entire draft. So you can and should give credit to teams which find talent as long as the appropriate level of criticism is also given when that team doesn't retain its talent. We have a tendency to not only miss on talent, but to overpay to keep underachieving players. Those numbers don't lie. And our record is directly attributed to that.

EDIT: As I have said many, many times, our problem is cultural. We have no idea how to spot talent in the draft nor recognize talent from trash on our own squad, so Jerry holds onto them for extended periods of time rather than cutting his losses and moving on. He does this so it looks like more of his picks "hit" than miss. The bad teams we see are not guilty of finding bad talent. Rather, they're guilty of bad coaching and poor organizational structure. All of those components are necessary for a winning team.
_________________

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
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 24694
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I want to love the metric. I do. I love stats. But to often it doesn't show the proper impact I wish it did.

I think both you and I would agree that the Steelers are consistently one of the better ran organizations in the NFL - yet they don't come anywhere close to the desired threshold of competent.

This statistic will always be skewed to bad teams because chances are if you are a bad team, you will have more 'starts.' I don't equate starts to good. I don't think you do either.

Like I said, the article has merit, but it leaves a lot to be desired. Of course, looking at it objectively, the 2009 Draft frankly probably contributed a great deal to our near last ranking. I think that's a year most of us would like to forget.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
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: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I want to love the metric. I do. I love stats. But to often it doesn't show the proper impact I wish it did.

I think both you and I would agree that the Steelers are consistently one of the better ran organizations in the NFL - yet they don't come anywhere close to the desired threshold of competent.

This statistic will always be skewed to bad teams because chances are if you are a bad team, you will have more 'starts.' I don't equate starts to good. I don't think you do either.

Like I said, the article has merit, but it leaves a lot to be desired. Of course, looking at it objectively, the 2009 Draft frankly probably contributed a great deal to our near last ranking. I think that's a year most of us would like to forget.


Oh, I agree on all accounts, T_O7. It's not the be-all and end-all, but it shows that certain teams can still be successful with sub-par drafts and that other teams still stink even with really good ones. It comes down to organizational culture. We have a bad culture and a history of not finding or developing later round guys as consistently as we need in key positions, where teams like New England and Pittsburgh do. It also shows that they have better coaches and better organizational structures, where the bottom feeders are proving themselves at having better scouting departments and/or GMs with respect to finding talent, but have terrible coaches and/or cheap owners. You need to have the right balance of both as well as a really good understanding of your own team and the talent and player value within it. We don't, and haven't since Jimmy was here. And even he missed on a ton of picks. The difference was that he had high volumes of picks to use every year (as New England does currently) and he cut players who underperformed regardless of where they were within their contract. He didn't hold onto under-performing players. He dumped them. Just as New England does now. Jerry holds onto them and then rewards them with overpriced extensions and can't understand why we don't win.
_________________

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
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 24694
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
Oh, I agree on all accounts, T_O7. It's not the be-all and end-all, but it shows that certain teams can still be successful with sub-par drafts and that other teams still stink even with really good ones. It comes down to organizational culture. We have a bad culture and a history of not finding or developing later round guys as consistently as we need in key positions, where teams like New England and Pittsburgh do. It also shows that they have better coaches and better organizational structures, where the bottom feeders are proving themselves at having better scouting departments and/or GMs with respect to finding talent, but have terrible coaches and/or cheap owners. You need to have the right balance of both as well as a really good understanding of your own team and the talent and player value within it. We don't, and haven't since Jimmy was here. And even he missed on a ton of picks. The difference was that he had high volumes of picks to use every year (as New England does currently) and he cut players who underperformed regardless of where they were within their contract. He didn't hold onto under-performing players. He dumped them. Just as New England does now. Jerry holds onto them and then rewards them with overpriced extensions and can't understand why we don't win.


I highlighted a phrase because I think it's something that often gets lost with revisionist history. Jimmy whiffed a lot. Great Coach. And got some fantastic pieces via FA. But perfect he was not.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
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: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Oh, I agree on all accounts, T_O7. It's not the be-all and end-all, but it shows that certain teams can still be successful with sub-par drafts and that other teams still stink even with really good ones. It comes down to organizational culture. We have a bad culture and a history of not finding or developing later round guys as consistently as we need in key positions, where teams like New England and Pittsburgh do. It also shows that they have better coaches and better organizational structures, where the bottom feeders are proving themselves at having better scouting departments and/or GMs with respect to finding talent, but have terrible coaches and/or cheap owners. You need to have the right balance of both as well as a really good understanding of your own team and the talent and player value within it. We don't, and haven't since Jimmy was here. And even he missed on a ton of picks. The difference was that he had high volumes of picks to use every year (as New England does currently) and he cut players who underperformed regardless of where they were within their contract. He didn't hold onto under-performing players. He dumped them. Just as New England does now. Jerry holds onto them and then rewards them with overpriced extensions and can't understand why we don't win.


I highlighted a phrase because I think it's something that often gets lost with revisionist history. Jimmy whiffed a lot. Great Coach. And got some fantastic pieces via FA. But perfect he was not.


He wasn't remotely close to perfect. He missed on a TON of draft picks, even high round picks. What he had going for him were two crucial and critical aspects of personnel mastery: 1) he was able to assemble a staff which developed later round talent very, very well, making the need for immediate impact players less important, and 2) he cut guys early and often, which often scare the crap out of players and motivated them to play better. Often times as we saw, it caused average players to overachieve because their will and desire was stronger than their ability but elevated it due to the culture of the team. That is not present in Dallas anymore, and it hasn't been here in literally 20 years. Parcells tried to do it, but the game had passed him by, and he was too old, too tired, and lacked the coaching staff around him to implement that philosophy.
_________________

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
Football Mensa


Joined: 13 Dec 2012
Posts: 621
Location: Texas via Louisiana and I love being Cajun...
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Oh, I agree on all accounts, T_O7. It's not the be-all and end-all, but it shows that certain teams can still be successful with sub-par drafts and that other teams still stink even with really good ones. It comes down to organizational culture. We have a bad culture and a history of not finding or developing later round guys as consistently as we need in key positions, where teams like New England and Pittsburgh do. It also shows that they have better coaches and better organizational structures, where the bottom feeders are proving themselves at having better scouting departments and/or GMs with respect to finding talent, but have terrible coaches and/or cheap owners. You need to have the right balance of both as well as a really good understanding of your own team and the talent and player value within it. We don't, and haven't since Jimmy was here. And even he missed on a ton of picks. The difference was that he had high volumes of picks to use every year (as New England does currently) and he cut players who underperformed regardless of where they were within their contract. He didn't hold onto under-performing players. He dumped them. Just as New England does now. Jerry holds onto them and then rewards them with overpriced extensions and can't understand why we don't win.


I highlighted a phrase because I think it's something that often gets lost with revisionist history. Jimmy whiffed a lot. Great Coach. And got some fantastic pieces via FA. But perfect he was not.


Who did Jimmy get in free agency that was great ? He did whiff but he acquired players either through the draft or trades. Free agency wasn't around when Jimmy took over. Plan b began a couple of years after he took over. That is what killed the depth on those Dallas teams. The difference between Jimmy and Jerry is Jimmy would cut someone and he didn't care how high they were drafted. Look how long Jerry held onto Tony Dixon. Dixon and Carpenter represent everything that Jerry stands for.
_________________
A circle. The direction the Cowboys continue to travel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Football Mensa


Joined: 13 Dec 2012
Posts: 621
Location: Texas via Louisiana and I love being Cajun...
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Parcells sucked huge at drafting. Look at what he did to the Phins. Think the Phins wish they had Matt Ryan instead of Jake Long ?

The 05 draft was stellar. And there is the problem. This team is still depending on those players. Instead of Jerry adding to those core guys and building a dominant powerful team he threw away the 06,07,08 and 09 drafts.

However it's not just the drafts. It's the coaching hires. Jerry deserves the heart crushing defeats. He deserves to not make the playoffs. He deserves all the frustration this team dishes out. The fans however , do not. He deserves the wrath of the fans. Jerry has an opportunity in this draft to right some wrongs but really with his history do you have confidence he will ?

From time to time I see the comment "I don't want to derail the thread and talk about Jerry, but"....you can't help it. He is the gm. He has built the team. He has run it into the ground. He has done nothing for the last 16 years to show he is a competent gm.
_________________
A circle. The direction the Cowboys continue to travel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 24694
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Football Mensa wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
plan9misfit wrote:
Oh, I agree on all accounts, T_O7. It's not the be-all and end-all, but it shows that certain teams can still be successful with sub-par drafts and that other teams still stink even with really good ones. It comes down to organizational culture. We have a bad culture and a history of not finding or developing later round guys as consistently as we need in key positions, where teams like New England and Pittsburgh do. It also shows that they have better coaches and better organizational structures, where the bottom feeders are proving themselves at having better scouting departments and/or GMs with respect to finding talent, but have terrible coaches and/or cheap owners. You need to have the right balance of both as well as a really good understanding of your own team and the talent and player value within it. We don't, and haven't since Jimmy was here. And even he missed on a ton of picks. The difference was that he had high volumes of picks to use every year (as New England does currently) and he cut players who underperformed regardless of where they were within their contract. He didn't hold onto under-performing players. He dumped them. Just as New England does now. Jerry holds onto them and then rewards them with overpriced extensions and can't understand why we don't win.


I highlighted a phrase because I think it's something that often gets lost with revisionist history. Jimmy whiffed a lot. Great Coach. And got some fantastic pieces via FA. But perfect he was not.


Who did Jimmy get in free agency that was great ? He did whiff but he acquired players either through the draft or trades. Free agency wasn't around when Jimmy took over. Plan b began a couple of years after he took over. That is what killed the depth on those Dallas teams. The difference between Jimmy and Jerry is Jimmy would cut someone and he didn't care how high they were drafted. Look how long Jerry held onto Tony Dixon. Dixon and Carpenter represent everything that Jerry stands for.


Jay Novacek, who while gotten under the guise of Plan B, was still a free agent acquired.

And I was also counting Charles Haley, who I forgot was traded for.

And I would say the biggest difference between Jimmy and Jerry is that one was a Head Coach, and the other wasn't.

Football Mensa wrote:
From time to time I see the comment "I don't want to derail the thread and talk about Jerry, but"....you can't help it. He is the gm. He has built the team. He has run it into the ground. He has done nothing for the last 16 years to show he is a competent gm.


You really can. You choose not to. There is a time and a place to discuss every individual issue and success. Because you choose not to is both annoying and frustrating when a thread is derailed.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Captain Zapp


Joined: 03 Jan 2012
Posts: 261
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I dont get all the gloom and doom. Since Jason and Jerry have been in colab mode on these drafts they have been knocking them out of the park. Its still a little too early to tell for this past year. Especially when a team moves up as far for a player as this team did you better hit on him. But it looks like there could be a few good players to come out of it besides Claiborne. Then just from 2011 drft this team was able to add Tyron Smith, Bruce Carter, DeMarco Murray, Dwayne Harris, and a CB who is getting regular rotation time (just for the wrong team). They also turned that years 7th round pick in to Josh Brent from the previous years supplemental draft iirc. He was a great 7th round addition before his accident. If you also want to partially count 2010 since he was asst HC and was really able to have his voice hold a lot of weight with Jerry and the team for the first time, then you can game changers Dez Bryant and Sean Lee as part of the draft haul they have put together in their short time together too. Sean Lissemore was also another 7th round steal out of that draft. All of that together equates to a very excited and optimistic me for this April 25th.

Off topic, but wasnt Jay Ratliff a 7th rounder too? Maybe the team should just trade for 2 or3 7th rounders and draft all DL.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Blitz9493


Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 157
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

plan9misfit wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
I fail to see what I said somehow disqualifies me as not having read the article when I read both that one and the one upon which all the numbers were accumulated.

Not saying it's an invalid article. It has some merit. But it also skews some perception. Giving credit to teams who drafted well but fail to keep resources. Measuring based on number of starts. Nor do I think anyone placed the full weight of the pro-bowl as the end all to a discussion.

Is the conclusion interesting? Sure. Is it a perfect statistic based on real world results? No.


The importance of the article is to show that the Cowboys organization can't continually find talent. Sure, we find them in the 1st or 2nd rounds, but nothing is sustained through an entire draft. So you can and should give credit to teams which find talent as long as the appropriate level of criticism is also given when that team doesn't retain its talent. We have a tendency to not only miss on talent, but to overpay to keep underachieving players. Those numbers don't lie. And our record is directly attributed to that.

EDIT: As I have said many, many times, our problem is cultural. We have no idea how to spot talent in the draft nor recognize talent from trash on our own squad, so Jerry holds onto them for extended periods of time rather than cutting his losses and moving on. He does this so it looks like more of his picks "hit" than miss. The bad teams we see are not guilty of finding bad talent. Rather, they're guilty of bad coaching and poor organizational structure. All of those components are necessary for a winning team.


Plan, I'm not saying that I disagree with your points, but this DraftMetrics.com's metric does not prove your point very well. I had some extra time at work and did a little statistical analysis on this. I compared regular season wins for each team in the last five years vs. the 5 year draft rankings (specifically using the index number provided). The correlation is very bad. The Multiple R for the regression is 0.369685775321819. You want that to be much closer to 1. 0.8 or -0.8 is considered to be a pretty good relationship. 0.5 or -0.5 is pretty poor. 0 is absolutely no relationship.

The scatterplot for this one looked like an oval instead of a line.

For grins, regular season wins in the last 5 years vs. the 10 year draft rankings produced a Multiple R of 0.249949481116029.

You know how correlation does not equal causation? Crappy correlation definitely does not equal causation. But, like I said, I don't necessarily disagree with your premise.


For those that took Statistics...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Northland


Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 4008
Location: Ajax, Ontario
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am a pretty simple guy. The Dallas Cowboys are not an upper echelon club. They are not a consistent playoff team. There must be a problem with talent acquisition and the draft is part of that. As someone said we hit big in 2005 and then kind of coasted through 2006 - 2008 and then had the absolute disaster of 2009. Let's take a look at our drafts from 2006 to 2011. I don't think it's fair to evaluate 2012 yet. We will know more about those taken after Claiborne during training camp. I am simply going to look at the number of picks from 2006-2011 and those players who will still be on our roster, or who project to be on the roster in 2013.

2006 - The Barbie draft. Only Jason Hatcher is left. 1 for 8. Ouch. Fasano was jettisoned too soon.

2007 - Anthony Spencer and Doug Free on the roster. Spencer has been solid but may be gone. Free is terrible. 2 for 8. Ouch.

2008 - Two first round picks in Jones and Jenkins who may in all liklihood be gone at the start of the 2013 season. We have Scandrick to show for this draft. Shouldn't two first round picks taken 5 years ago be part of the cornerstone of your club? Took Martellus Bennett in the second. This draft hurts. Looks like a 1 for 6 heading into 2013. Ouch.

2009. The Special Teams draft that wasn't so special. On our roster are Victor Butler a marginal LB and John Phillips a backup TE. 2 for12.

2010 - Things pick up. We have Bryant, Lee, and Lissemore. Lee has battled injuries. Hopefully we see more of Lissemore this year. 3 for 6 with a terrific WR and a great leader at ILB. Much better.

2011 - Smith, Carter, Murray, and some contributions from Harris. Smith is a cornerstone OT. Carter and Murray can be dominant if they stay healthy. Better. 3 starters and a contributor at WR. Arkin still hanging around. Not bad. 4 for 8.

Total picks 48. Projected players on roster heading into 2013 = 13. Just over 25%. I will say five of those guys Bryant, Lee, Smith, Carter, and Murray are high level players who you can build around even though 3 of them have injury concerns. Five out of 48 = 10% of players drafted over a six year period are solid contributors. One per draft. Don't know the league average but I don't think that cuts it.

Many believe that the foundation of success is building in the trenches. Thirteen of the players drafted over 2006-2011 were lineman. 9 OL and 4 DL. Of the offensive linemen, only 1 was a first round pick Tyron Smith. I think we hit there. Of the rest we have two picks in the third round (Marten and Brewster), two in the fourth (Free and Arkin), one in the sixth (Young) and three in the seventh (McQuistan, Whitley, and Nagy). We have not ignored the offensive line. But our philosophy seems to be pick them in the mid to late rounds and we will coach them up. I would hazzard to say that this philosophy has not worked. Back to the drawing board.

On the D Line we have 4 picks over the 2006 - 2011 time frame. The highest was Hatcher in the third round. Williams in the 4th, Stanley in the 6th, and Lissemore in the 7th. We have not ignored the D Line. Four of 48 picks went to the D Line but the highest was a third rounder and we have two marginal players to show for it. Again our strategy for the D Line seems to be mid to low round picks and we will coach them up. Again I am confident in expressing my opinion that this strategy has failed.

In summary over the 2006 - 2011 time frame we have a strange attitude towards drafting lineman that has not worked well at all. We missed big time on our two first round picks in 2008 in Jones and Jenkins and I say that because it looks like both will be gone and not part of the foundation which they should be. This miss was followed up by the disaster of 2009.

2006-2011 represents a spotty draft period at best which helps to explain why we are spinning our wheels on the mediocrity highway. Yes the drafts of 2010 and 2011 have been better but even those players acquired during those drafts can't overcome what transpired before.

My little exercise was not about being a revisionist historian and saying should've drafted this guy or that guy. It's simply about looking at what the Cowboys did, and what they accomplished.
_________________
Northland
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nextyearfordaboyz


Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 17256
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This study is extremely flawed at best and a complete embarrassment at worst.

Three of the four categories that are weighted into this measurement strongly favor crappy teams. No surprise, Chiefs, Cardinals, Dolphins, and Browns are the top 4, and the two Super Bowl teams are ranked #21 and #24. If these results were legitimate (which they clearly are not), the only conclusion would be that drafting well is virtually meaningless (which, of course, is not true).

I mean seriously, Blaine Gabbert would be a better selection than Colin Kaepernick according to this "analysis".

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize Jerry Jones. I don't think I'll ever understand why the haters use crap like this to support their argument.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nextyearfordaboyz


Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 17256
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As for the last 3 years:

Dallas Cowboys - 6 starters
Dez Bryant
Sean Lee
Tyron Smith
Bruce Carter
DeMarco Murray
Morris Claiborne

Baltimore Ravens - 6 starters
Terrence Cody
Ed Dickson
Torrey Smith
Pernell McPhee
Courtney Upshaw
Kelechi Osemele

San Francisco 49ers - 6 starters
Anthony Davis
Mike Iupati
Navorro Bowman
Aldon Smith
Colin Kaepernick
Bruce Miller

We may have put up a few poor drafts in '08-'09, but there aren't a lot of teams that can claim the haul we've had in the past 3 years.
_________________


Last edited by Nextyearfordaboyz on Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:28 pm; edited 2 times in total
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, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
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