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

NY Giants 19th Pick Justin Pugh G Syracuse
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Giants
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 45228
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

1. Kiffin on why they passed on Floyd and Ciskowski on why they passed on Floyd - both say that they liked him as a player, but not for the scheme.

2. Equal value as in they rated Sylvester Williams and a 3rd round pick as equal to Floyd. As in they rated Travis Frederick and a 3rd round pick as better than Pugh or Long.

3. Why would a team with $5m in cap space be worried about $300k? The 5th year option is a different story all together and simply allows the Cowboys to control a player for longer, providing them an advantage at 31 that they wouldn't have at 33. I may have misunderstood your post, but I don't understand why you would think that they moved from 18 to 31 b/c of the salary cap or that they took offensive guard in the first b/c he would be cheaper to sign on a rookie contract than a WR or other player.

Now it seems like you're going 4-5 years into the future when their rookie contract is up, but the Cowboys worrying about what it'll cost to resign a player is asinine as their only concern is finding a player that can be a starter day 1 and a long term player at a high level. They would LOVE to have an elite DT or G that they have to give a big contract to in 5 years b/c that means the pick was a success. Not to mention that draft position plays ZERO roll in a post-rookie contract. Look at Doug Free - 5th round pick, got tendered then resigned to a huge LT contract b/c he had played at an elite level at the LT position. His non-rookie contract had nothing to do with his draft position.

Again - if you think the money played a roll in why the moved down, you would have to acknowledge that they added another pick and therefore another salary which hurts your theory even further.
_________________


Sig courtesy of mack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
1. Kiffin on why they passed on Floyd and Ciskowski on why they passed on Floyd - both say that they liked him as a player, but not for the scheme.

2. Equal value as in they rated Sylvester Williams and a 3rd round pick as equal to Floyd. As in they rated Travis Frederick and a 3rd round pick as better than Pugh or Long.

3. Why would a team with $5m in cap space be worried about $300k? The 5th year option is a different story all together and simply allows the Cowboys to control a player for longer, providing them an advantage at 31 that they wouldn't have at 33. I may have misunderstood your post, but I don't understand why you would think that they moved from 18 to 31 b/c of the salary cap or that they took offensive guard in the first b/c he would be cheaper to sign on a rookie contract than a WR or other player.

Now it seems like you're going 4-5 years into the future when their rookie contract is up, but the Cowboys worrying about what it'll cost to resign a player is asinine as their only concern is finding a player that can be a starter day 1 and a long term player at a high level. They would LOVE to have an elite DT or G that they have to give a big contract to in 5 years b/c that means the pick was a success. Not to mention that draft position plays ZERO roll in a post-rookie contract. Look at Doug Free - 5th round pick, got tendered then resigned to a huge LT contract b/c he had played at an elite level at the LT position. His non-rookie contract had nothing to do with his draft position.

Again - if you think the money played a roll in why the moved down, you would have to acknowledge that they added another pick and therefore another salary which hurts your theory even further.


You sound like I'm making this stuff up. Really you need to listen to their pre and post draft conferences with the media. It was clearly a concern with them. They spoke of it a lot in the pre draft conference and even touched on it again with the Webb pick up in the post draft conference.

Not sure where Free comes in, I think all Dallas fans would agree that Free is overpaid, again his name was mentioned in the pre draft meeting in regards to their salary cap and that they'd like to see a rookie come in a take the position from a veteran to save cap space.

Seriously man...you are really sounding like I'm pulling this out of my arse all I'm doing is repeating what your general manager is saying. Don't kill the messenger. This isn't my theory just stating the facts as to what your front office has already said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
1. Kiffin on why they passed on Floyd and Ciskowski on why they passed on Floyd - both say that they liked him as a player, but not for the scheme.

2. Equal value as in they rated Sylvester Williams and a 3rd round pick as equal to Floyd. As in they rated Travis Frederick and a 3rd round pick as better than Pugh or Long.

3. Why would a team with $5m in cap space be worried about $300k? The 5th year option is a different story all together and simply allows the Cowboys to control a player for longer, providing them an advantage at 31 that they wouldn't have at 33. I may have misunderstood your post, but I don't understand why you would think that they moved from 18 to 31 b/c of the salary cap or that they took offensive guard in the first b/c he would be cheaper to sign on a rookie contract than a WR or other player.

Now it seems like you're going 4-5 years into the future when their rookie contract is up, but the Cowboys worrying about what it'll cost to resign a player is asinine as their only concern is finding a player that can be a starter day 1 and a long term player at a high level. They would LOVE to have an elite DT or G that they have to give a big contract to in 5 years b/c that means the pick was a success. Not to mention that draft position plays ZERO roll in a post-rookie contract. Look at Doug Free - 5th round pick, got tendered then resigned to a huge LT contract b/c he had played at an elite level at the LT position. His non-rookie contract had nothing to do with his draft position.

Again - if you think the money played a roll in why the moved down, you would have to acknowledge that they added another pick and therefore another salary which hurts your theory even further.


Have you taken the time to listen to their press conferences?

Here are links to all of them after listening to all the clips and you still disagree that the Dallas Cowboys didn't consider the salary cap in their draft planning, I'll welcome the debate. I've listened to them all a couple times actually and after hearing their discussion, to me it clearly played a role in their draft planning.

You mentioned that my "theory" was being hurt with this logic of salary cap implications, but Stephen Jones said himself, from a financial standpoint that it would increase the salary pool slightly but drafting a rookie was obviously cheaper than going and getting a free agent. You'll find him speaking of that early in the meeting on the day 3 conference.


http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/PreDraft_Press_Conference/b0ef52da-157d-452c-91e7-f5d0658ad5bb

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/1st_Round_Press_Conference/b98b3cf4-5fb4-4479-8e58-d159488f6d2f

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/Day_2_PostDraft_Press_Conference/acd6e072-e45f-475b-9fc6-172bac5e3d6a

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/Day_3_PostDraft_Press_Conference/3796a69e-3773-4a8d-ba41-9dccecd23b09
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
GmenSeattle


Moderator
Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 10194
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 6:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Arguing with MaddHatter is a great way to pad your post counts. Laughing
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 45228
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have listened to every draft related commentary related to Dallas including the ones you listed. If you think cap was a reason for the moves we made in the draft I welcome you to make your case using direct quotes in context. Knowledge of the salary cap should be a strength prior to entering this debate though as it will get very heavy on the numbers should we proceed.
_________________


Sig courtesy of mack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
I have listened to every draft related commentary related to Dallas including the ones you listed. If you think cap was a reason for the moves we made in the draft I welcome you to make your case using direct quotes in context. Knowledge of the salary cap should be a strength prior to entering this debate though as it will get very heavy on the numbers should we proceed.


No offense man, but I shouldn't have to quote anything if you've listened to the links I've posted, the front office is saying it. Are you wanting the quote them saying it because you didn't hear them say it? or what they said about the salary cap doesn't jive with your understanding when they spoke of salary cap?

Little confused as to why you don't think them discussing the salary cap during a pre-draft and post-draft conference isn't related to their draft planning.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GmenSeattle wrote:
Arguing with MaddHatter is a great way to pad your post counts. Laughing


Lol...I'm seeing that now.

What I don't understand is why he's going on and on about it, when all I'm doing is stating what their front office has openly spoke about during their press conferences.

oop. another pad. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
w4rrior723


Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 5170
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

**grab's popcorn... put's it down after remember the chips stash and hummus in the fridge**

Show him the quotes! Laughing Razz
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
I have listened to every draft related commentary related to Dallas including the ones you listed. If you think cap was a reason for the moves we made in the draft I welcome you to make your case using direct quotes in context. Knowledge of the salary cap should be a strength prior to entering this debate though as it will get very heavy on the numbers should we proceed.


Alright MaddHatter,

I feel like Iím going back on my word if I donít debate this with you, I said that Iíd welcome the debate if you listened to the pre and post draft conferences. Heading into this debate, I'll admit that I have no idea what the salary cap numbers are and really don't care what they are for Dallas or any other team as it does not relate to this debate. You mentioned something about them having 5 million dollars after the restructure, if you will of Tony Romoís contract. I get that and with that additional cap they signed a couple cheap safeties that were easy on the cap. Again the amount of money that they have isn't a concern in this debate so no need to crack out your calculator. Iím merely debating that the Dallas Cowboys considered the salary cap implications with their draft decisions.

Now, Iím not going to quote several minutes of Jerry Jones talking to the media. Personally I donít think thereís enough paper available to translate his stumbling chatter of drawn out Umís and Uhís (words commonly used in times of indecision or Iím thinking and I probably wonít have a very good answer). So rather than kill my fingers and my buzz Iíll be posting frame times linked to the conference that you can search up and decide for yourself if Jerry Jones and Stephen Jones are discussing the salary cap being relative to the draft.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/PreDraft_Press_Conference/b0ef52da-157d-452c-91e7-f5d0658ad5bb

Starting Frame Time: 14:50
Ending Frame Time: 21:20

Jerry and Stephen discuss the cap being relative to the draft decisions. Jerry Jones also discusses that teams are going to draft offensive lineman earlier in the draft because of cap implications.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/1st_Round_Press_Conference/b98b3cf4-5fb4-4479-8e58-d159488f6d2f

Now, after listening to Jones speak about the offensive lineman being taken earlier than where they would normally be selected due to cap implications discussed in the pre-draft conference, the Cowboys selected center with their 31st overall pick. This pick being a controversial trade as several media argued the value of the trade being of better value to San Fran based on trade value charts that Jerry Jones proudly admits to inventing. Still not sure why they call that value chart Jimmy Johnsonís, according to Jerry is should have Jerry World printed on the header.

Aside from the trade that Stephen Jones canít seem to recall who initiated, Jerry said that they were ready to select Frederick at 18 after their dream players of interior lineman were taken earlier in the draft. (Frame time 17:40) this being after Stephen Jones stated that they had other players rated higher on their board than where Frederick was rated. (Frame time 11:45) It was clear that interior lineman was a need but more importantly it was a cap friendly position that Jerry Jones targeted as a must have. Personally, Iíd be thankful that you picked Frederick at 31 because if for some crazy reason another team drafted him earlier, Jerry would still be trading the 18th pick, much like he did a few years back when he decided to go all Special Olympic class of í09. Anyway Iím getting sidetracked moving along.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/Day_2_PostDraft_Press_Conference/acd6e072-e45f-475b-9fc6-172bac5e3d6a

Day 2 talks, again they discuss the hope of having one of the top tier guards fall to them but it didn't work out so they called San Fran to draft Frederick at 31, where they knew he would be there at the bottom of the first round.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/multimedia/videos/Day_3_PostDraft_Press_Conference/3796a69e-3773-4a8d-ba41-9dccecd23b09

Frame time: 00:41

Stephan answers a question from the media about how trading down affected the team financially in terms of the rookie pool. His answer was that it slightly increased the rookie pool but that adding a rookie thatís going to make the 53 is a big plus in terms of the salary cap. It keeps them from having to sign a veteran at a higher price.

Frame time: 24:20

Jerry said that Webb was great value on the board and will be a great value cap wise as they look ahead. He touched on the importance of having rookies on the roster because of the new CBA agreement. Talks about impact on cap, impact on cap two three years down the road, impact on game day rosters, oh and btw can he coverÖjokingly

Alright MaddHatter you're probably thinking the new blood taste more like vinegar right about now but that wasn't my intention just keeping true to my word of a debate about whether or not Dallasí front office considered the salary cap when discussing the draft and according to some padding my post. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

w4rrior723 wrote:
**grab's popcorn... put's it down after remember the chips stash and hummus in the fridge**

Show him the quotes! Laughing Razz


Hows the Hummus?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
GEE MEN


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 4097
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 7:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
1. Kiffin on why they passed on Floyd and Ciskowski on why they passed on Floyd - both say that they liked him as a player, but not for the scheme.


That's nonsense spin. Jerry pooped the bed again drafting a 3rd rounder in the 1st and everyone else is simply talking the party line. With the best 3-technique on the board and the Cowboys having already given him a grade as the 7th best player on their board and all of a sudden he doesn't fit their "scheme"? Laughing C'mon man!!! That's why nobody takes Jerry or the Cowboys seriously. Jerry simply should have told the truth -- we just spent a ton of money on Romo-- he insisted that we address the offensive line and so we selected who we thought was the best center regardless of value or grade. At least the would be more respectable.
_________________


Desperado82 wrote:
I will never defend Romo again. I'm done. We may only have a shot at the playoffs or what have you because of him, but he will NEVER put us over the hump.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MaddHatter


Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 45228
Location: ROH Class of 14
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 8:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GEE MEN wrote:
With the best 3-technique on the board


This tells me you don't understand defensive schemes and are just talking out your rear. But please go and define what a 3-tech does and why Floyd is the best one in the draft at 18 at doing that.

ny92jefferis - I want to take the proper time to acknowledge your argument and provide my own so please allow me a few hours to get back to you at a more appropriate time (8am at the office not being that). I appreciate the approach you are taking to this debate and am glad that you are a poster here, even if it's for a rival.
_________________


Sig courtesy of mack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 9:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MaddHatter wrote:
GEE MEN wrote:
With the best 3-technique on the board


This tells me you don't understand defensive schemes and are just talking out your rear. But please go and define what a 3-tech does and why Floyd is the best one in the draft at 18 at doing that.

ny92jefferis - I want to take the proper time to acknowledge your argument and provide my own so please allow me a few hours to get back to you at a more appropriate time (8am at the office not being that). I appreciate the approach you are taking to this debate and am glad that you are a poster here, even if it's for a rival.


No worries man, take your time.

Earlier in a post you mentioned reasons why the d - coord and asst. director of player personnel opted not to draft DT Floyd.

Here is snippit of that post.

Quote:
1. Kiffin on why they passed on Floyd and Ciskowski on why they passed on Floyd - both say that they liked him as a player, but not for the scheme.


After reading both post it would seem that Ciskowski and Garrett wanted Floyd at 18 rather than opting to trade down, in what Jerry Jones and his son wanted.

Quote:
The Dallas Cowboys had a first-round grade on Florida defensive tackle Sharrif Floyd. He was probably the top player on the Cowboysí draft board when they were supposed to pick at No. 18 in the first round. But they chose to trade back and Floyd went to the Minnesota Vikings at No. 23.

So why have him on the board?

Well, because they liked Floyd as a player but some in the organization werenít sold on how heíd fit into their new 4-3 scheme.

Judging solely off the body language of Cowboys coach Jason Garrett and assistant director of player personnel Tom Ciskowski, trading back and missing out on a player like Floyd wasnít the unanimous decision.

Ciskowski doesnít have final say on the players the Cowboys draft. He presents information to the team and itís up to Jerry Jones, Stephen Jones and the coaching staff to ultimately make the decision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
fracdaddy14


Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Posts: 3453
Location: Northeastern PA
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I must say it has to be hard keeping up with the Jones's.

We just need to upload a GIF or Pic of Jason Garrett from the Cowboy's War Room. The Cowboys will go back to sipping drinks in Cabo next season while the Giants will likely be fighting again for another Lombardi. I "hear" the Cowboys are targeting Austin Seferian-Jenkins, TE, Washington, in Round 1.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ny92jefferis


Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 2392
PostPosted: Thu May 02, 2013 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fracdaddy14 wrote:
I must say it has to be hard keeping up with the Jones's.

We just need to upload a GIF or Pic of Jason Garrett from the Cowboy's War Room. The Cowboys will go back to sipping drinks in Cabo next season while the Giants will likely be fighting again for another Lombardi. I "hear" the Cowboys are targeting Austin Seferian-Jenkins, TE, Washington, in Round 1.


Do you have a link to the picture of Garrett when the trade/ pick was announced? I keep hearing that he didn't look none to happy about the trade down, but have yet to see a picture.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New York Giants All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 8 of 10

 
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