Cowboys off season - training camp is almost here!!!

[Dallas94Ware]

3 hours ago, Rtnldave said:

Yeah, the Iggles just won a frickin SB with those 1 year prove it deals.

They supplimented a great roster with those guys. They didnt build a roster with those guys.

They already had a great front 7 and killer rush. And added Chris Long to a rotation of 5 that was already good. That OL was all home grown. They added two runners behind it that arent stars on their own but together made a good tandem behind a very darn good OL.

[Dallas94Ware]

5 hours ago, DaBoys said:

He looked decent in 2016 when we were actively masking and protecting him within the scheme.  He looked exposed last year when we, according to the owners son, ran an offense built for someone with near opposite skill set. Or at least, an offense designed for a QB with a little more polish in certain areas.

I wouldnt say he was exposed as much as he was abused. The protection at times was horrendous, and defenses keyed in that Dez had dropsies in cloud coverage, Beasley was ineffective with a LB in his path, Witten couldnt run very far and Williams was useless. Dak had very little to work with. When he did he was still largely effective.

Hurns threatening a defense should let Beasley run free more often, and hopefully Dez can step up his game again without the safetys clouding. That should let Dak be Dak again. 

[Rtnldave]

On 4/7/2018 at 5:46 PM, plan9misfit said:

They also won because they’re better coached and have a real front office.

I don't deny it, but the 1 year deals are a great way to get eh most out of your FA, motivate them and still not kill yourselves on the salary cap down the line.

[Rtnldave]

On 4/7/2018 at 8:07 PM, Dallas94Ware said:

They supplimented a great roster with those guys. They didnt build a roster with those guys.

They already had a great front 7 and killer rush. And added Chris Long to a rotation of 5 that was already good. That OL was all home grown. They added two runners behind it that arent stars on their own but together made a good tandem behind a very darn good OL.

Only Chris long huh? What about Jerrnigan? Cox was very effective but paired with TJ from the Ravens, they became a force in stopping the run AND getting pressure up the middle. Something I have been preaching for about 2 decades now.

Just so many of you who believe the Iggles team was homegrown, here is a list of FA and Trades they made that all contributed to their title run:

1. Al Jeffrey WR

2. T. Smith WR

3. T. Jerrnigan DT

4. S Wiesnewski C

5. N. Foles QB

6. J. Ajayi RB

7. L Blount RB

8. C. Warmack G

9. R. Darby DB

10. P. Robinson DB

11. Elliott K

12.  M. Jenkins (2014) DB

With that said, not including M. Jenkins, I count 11 players. That is an ENTIRE UNIT on the field. You can only put 11 players on the field at a time.

So, you are going to tell me that this SB winning team was Home Grown???

Not from what I'm seeing. I saw

1. Cox

2. Ertz

3. L. Johnson

4. Agholor

5. Kelce

6. Curry

7. Graham

8. Bradham

9. Kendricks

To name a few. Granted, they have more home grown players on the roster, but what put them over the top were the players they signed in FA or traded for.

[Dallas94Ware]

21 minutes ago, Rtnldave said:

Only Chris long huh? What about Jerrnigan? Cox was very effective but paired with TJ from the Ravens, they became a force in stopping the run AND getting pressure up the middle. Something I have been preaching for about 2 decades now.

Just so many of you who believe the Iggles team was homegrown, here is a list of FA and Trades they made that all contributed to their title run:

1. Al Jeffrey WR

2. T. Smith WR

3. T. Jerrnigan DT

4. S Wiesnewski C

5. N. Foles QB

6. J. Ajayi RB

7. L Blount RB

8. C. Warmack G

9. R. Darby DB

10. P. Robinson DB

11. Elliott K

12.  M. Jenkins (2014) DB

With that said, not including M. Jenkins, I count 11 players. That is an ENTIRE UNIT on the field. You can only put 11 players on the field at a time.

So, you are going to tell me that this SB winning team was Home Grown???

Not from what I'm seeing. I saw

1. Cox

2. Ertz

3. L. Johnson

4. Agholor

5. Kelce

6. Curry

7. Graham

8. Bradham

9. Kendricks

To name a few. Granted, they have more home grown players on the roster, but what put them over the top were the players they signed in FA or traded for.

Contributed. You said it yourself. All of the Eagles signings and trades were part of a collective effort supplimenting what was already a.stout defense and a damn good OL. And how did they beat the Pats? With said OL and D. 

Im.not saying their signings didnt help. But they were contributors. Playing a part of a bigger picture. They didnt go and replace 6/11ths of their starting offense and 5/11ths of their syarting offense like Rams ae running off doing. No, the Eagles built depth, rotation, and planted in a few new uogrades in the starting lineup. And even then, those new starters? Not even close to being on the field fulltime

They are an exception, as well. Most teams who go and sign and trade for all these new faces, maybe get a single year of good play somewhere in a small timw frame before realizing the cap has caught up with them.

98% of Super Bowl winners in this era, even Super Bowl contenders, are built via the draft. Go back 4, 3, 2, and 1 drafts prior to each SB win and lool at their picks. They drafted outstanding for that 4 year period usually. Others, like the Pats, had just been drafting fairly well for 10+ years. But there is a strong correlation between how a team drafted for the last 4 years and their relative success in the playoffs and Super Bowl. For a reason.

[Rtnldave]

1 hour ago, Dallas94Ware said:

Contributed. You said it yourself. All of the Eagles signings and trades were part of a collective effort supplimenting what was already a.stout defense and a damn good OL. And how did they beat the Pats? With said OL and D. 

Im.not saying their signings didnt help. But they were contributors. Playing a part of a bigger picture. They didnt go and replace 6/11ths of their starting offense and 5/11ths of their syarting offense like Rams ae running off doing. No, the Eagles built depth, rotation, and planted in a few new uogrades in the starting lineup. And even then, those new starters? Not even close to being on the field fulltime

They are an exception, as well. Most teams who go and sign and trade for all these new faces, maybe get a single year of good play somewhere in a small timw frame before realizing the cap has caught up with them.

98% of Super Bowl winners in this era, even Super Bowl contenders, are built via the draft. Go back 4, 3, 2, and 1 drafts prior to each SB win and lool at their picks. They drafted outstanding for that 4 year period usually. Others, like the Pats, had just been drafting fairly well for 10+ years. But there is a strong correlation between how a team drafted for the last 4 years and their relative success in the playoffs and Super Bowl. For a reason.

Okay, but all of those ummm starters were only good enough last year to get them a legit 6 wins. We GAVE them game 7 in Philly. So, just how good were their Home Grown guys, only a year ago good enough to finish last in the NFC East.

Add said players, they win a SB.

I guess it is all in how you look at it.

http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/team/statistics.html

Blount and Ajayi led them in Rushing.

P. Robinson had the most INT's

A. Jeffrey had the 2nd most Receiving yards and the most TD's

I fail to see how these additions were mere role players.

 

[Rtnldave]

To that point, and please understand I'm not calling you a liar, but to my way of thinking an example of contributing players that helped to get you over the top would be:

1. C. Haley

2. T. Everett

3. T. Casias

These were players the Cowboys signed in 91-92 season. They had already established themselves as a contender the year before when they won a WC game in Chicago and then lost to Det in the Div. You saw their progression thru the draft from 1-15 in 89 Aikman's first year, to 7-9 in 1990 Emmitt's first year, to  11-5 in 91 Russell Maryland's first year, add the FA players in 92 and THAT helped them get over the top.

The Iggles were dead last in the division last year. They replaced all but 1 of their WR's and their entire starting backfield along with 2 players in their secondary. There was no period of learning for all of these players. There was no progression from season to season. They just came in and dominated after finishing last in the NFC East the previous year with the players they traded or let go.

Again, if you tend to look at their offseason  moves as bolstering and not replacing, that's your prerogative. But I fail to see how these new players led the team in statistical categories and helped them beat a dynasty of 10 years after they finished dead last in the division only several months prior and ONLY consider that supplementing.

[CAPJ]

3 minutes ago, Rtnldave said:

To that point, and please understand I'm not calling you a liar, but to my way of thinking an example of contributing players that helped to get you over the top would be:

1. C. Haley

2. T. Everett

3. T. Casias

These were players the Cowboys signed in 91-92 season. They had already established themselves as a contender the year before when they won a WC game in Chicago and then lost to Det in the Div. You saw their progression thru the draft from 1-15 in 89 Aikman's first year, to 7-9 in 1990 Emmitt's first year, to  11-5 in 91 Russell Maryland's first year, add the FA players in 92 and THAT helped them get over the top.

The Iggles were dead last in the division last year. They replaced all but 1 of their WR's and their entire starting backfield along with 2 players in their secondary. There was no period of learning for all of these players. There was no progression from season to season. They just came in and dominated after finishing last in the NFC East the previous year with the players they traded or let go.

Again, if you tend to look at their offseason  moves as bolstering and not replacing, that's your prerogative. But I fail to see how these new players led the team in statistical categories and helped them beat a dynasty of 10 years after they finished dead last in the division only several months prior and ONLY consider that supplementing.

I would agree that they did sign a few key players that made a great impact. I would love to see more 1 year high dollar prove it deals as well.

I think one glaring thing you are missing from your argument is coaching. Philly's coaches did an amazing job coaching, adjusting for injuries and putting their plays in position to make plays. Something our team lacks.

[Dallas94Ware]

2 hours ago, Rtnldave said:

Okay, but all of those ummm starters were only good enough last year to get them a legit 6 wins. We GAVE them game 7 in Philly. So, just how good were their Home Grown guys, only a year ago good enough to finish last in the NFC East.

Add said players, they win a SB.

I guess it is all in how you look at it.

http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/team/statistics.html

Blount and Ajayi led them in Rushing.

P. Robinson had the most INT's

A. Jeffrey had the 2nd most Receiving yards and the most TD's

I fail to see how these additions were mere role players.

 

They played with a rookie QB, a rookie HC and ran into bad luck in several games. It is hard tonmuster more than 6 wins with a rookie QB, especially coming from the division Wentz came from. Add in the close matchups they had, and it xould have easily been 9 wins. Similar to Dallas this past year, a bad bounce or fumble away from 10 or 11 wins despite quite a talented roster.

Jeffery didnt even hit 1000 yards. 

Robinson benefitted from a tremendous pass rush by home grown products.

Blount was nothing without Ajayi and vice versa, they needed each other. And Clements (think thats his name?) was a.big part of that too. All three needed each other, and all played a role given situation, blocking, and the front they llayed against. None on their own was a load baring starter.

And you are also neglecting one tremendous fact: All those home grown draftees that were second years and rookies last year, had a whole extra year to improve and learn. Not just Wentz. 

If you look at their defense and offensive line, both of which wete their keys to success, the big playmakers and majority snap players were 1, 2, 3 N 4 year guys drafted by the team. As i pointed out earlier, look.back at 4 years worth of drafts and it will always tell the story of how a team won their ring.

Very few teams in history built a winner by spending big and building a FA roster. Even if you attributed it to Philly, which you shouldnt but if you must insist upon so, that is 1 team in how many decades that found success in doing so? And i still say they didnt do so - their.biggest factors (Wentz, the pass rush, and the pass protection) were almost all draftees.

[Rtnldave]

3 hours ago, CAPJ said:

I would agree that they did sign a few key players that made a great impact. I would love to see more 1 year high dollar prove it deals as well.

I think one glaring thing you are missing from your argument is coaching. Philly's coaches did an amazing job coaching, adjusting for injuries and putting their plays in position to make plays. Something our team lacks.

Yea, no argument from me there.

[Rtnldave]

3 hours ago, Dallas94Ware said:

They played with a rookie QB, a rookie HC and ran into bad luck in several games. It is hard tonmuster more than 6 wins with a rookie QB, especially coming from the division Wentz came from. Add in the close matchups they had, and it xould have easily been 9 wins. Similar to Dallas this past year, a bad bounce or fumble away from 10 or 11 wins despite quite a talented roster.

Jeffery didnt even hit 1000 yards. 

Robinson benefitted from a tremendous pass rush by home grown products.

Blount was nothing without Ajayi and vice versa, they needed each other. And Clements (think thats his name?) was a.big part of that too. All three needed each other, and all played a role given situation, blocking, and the front they llayed against. None on their own was a load baring starter.

And you are also neglecting one tremendous fact: All those home grown draftees that were second years and rookies last year, had a whole extra year to improve and learn. Not just Wentz. 

If you look at their defense and offensive line, both of which wete their keys to success, the big playmakers and majority snap players were 1, 2, 3 N 4 year guys drafted by the team. As i pointed out earlier, look.back at 4 years worth of drafts and it will always tell the story of how a team won their ring.

Very few teams in history built a winner by spending big and building a FA roster. Even if you attributed it to Philly, which you shouldnt but if you must insist upon so, that is 1 team in how many decades that found success in doing so? And i still say they didnt do so - their.biggest factors (Wentz, the pass rush, and the pass protection) were almost all draftees.

Wentz didn't even play the last 2 months. I will add NE won SB with multiple FA signings and trades only a year earlier. With some of the same players.

The difference is NE was already an accomplished team and perrennial contender.

[WizardHawk]

Quote

 

The one-year deal signed by Kony Ealy with the Cowboys can be worth up to $2 million. He received a $200,000 signing bonus and $800,000 base salary and has up to $250,000 available in 46-man roster bonuses. For him to earn the max amount, he will have to record at least 12 sacks and play in 75 percent of the snaps in 2018.

Todd Archer, ESPN Staff Writer

 

 

[Texas_OutLaw7]

1 hour ago, WizardHawk said:

 

fantastic deal.

[matt79511]

Hey look it's good news

[DaBoys]

Guess we didn't need that 1st round tender after all