Cowboy Fans....Brace yourselves for 2014.

[Randall Creed]

Originally Posted by pyramider

Teams cannot just cut players nowadays. If a player is not performing to cut means a salary cap hit. A mean coach can be tuned out or muted due to no fear.

Works both ways. Maybe they're tired of hearing Garrett now. Been listening to him for 6-7 years.

[EZ.]

Originally Posted by pyramider

Teams cannot just cut players nowadays. If a player is not performing to cut means a salary cap hit. A mean coach can be tuned out or muted due to no fear.

True, but if they are not at the end of their careers, he can cut their playing time and use them only selectively and destroy their marketability and future earnings.

[Prolongus]

[QUOTE=OldLRRP;1055704737]

Originally Posted by Prolongus

Would love to see Bill Cowher coach this team...Garrett's just too nice for football. Just by hiring him I'd respect Jerry a little more (if he'd get the fuck out of the way).

The Cowboys need a scowling, mad-dog asshole to keep them fearful of their jobs. A Mike Ditka type. Cowher.

Tom Landry type?

Maybe. Murchison let Landry & Schram run the show. I believe Murchison only gave them 1 year contracts, too. But he stayed the fuck out of the way. I never even saw what Murchison looked like until he sold the team in the 1980's.

Jerry's statement before he fired Jimmy that any of 500 coaches could coach the team is perfectly honest. He had a top ten coach in the beginning. Too bad Jerry is #500.

Jerry might be the only owner in history that fired 3 Super Bowl winning coaches in less than 10 years (if you include Barry. Or did he just want to go back to his couch?).

[Guest050619-1]

Originally Posted by pyramider

Teams cannot just cut players nowadays. If a player is not performing to cut means a salary cap hit.

Oh you can cut 'em alright. All day long, as a matter of fact.....especially when you're drafting as if you're crack addict or (selecting players for your "special teams"....remember that comment?) Want to see a reason why Dallas seems to stay in Salary Cap Hell every year?

The Cowboys (tied Pats) for the most picks with 12 in the 2009 draft. Now these are players that should be kicking off their fifth year in the league this upcoming season; contributing as starters or as quality depth on the roster. Look at this:

Traded their first rounder to Detroit for wr Roy Williams
Traded their second round pick to Buffalo for a 3rd and a 4th
3rd r Jason Williams
3rd r Robert Brewster
4th r Stephen Magee
4th r Brandon Williams
4th r Victor Butler
5th r DeAngelo Smith
5th r Michael Hamlin
5th r David Buehler
6th r Stephen Hodge
6th r John Phillips
7th r Mike Mickens
7th r Manuel Johnson

What do these guys have in common with one another? NONE of them were on the Cowboys' roster as of March 18, 2013.....the last one remaining was officially cut on that date.

For the record, that first rounder (which was the 20th pick that round) Jerry sent to Detroit became TE Brandon Pettigrew.

Here's a handful of Pro Bowlers Dallas would've had a shot at had Jerry not given that 1st round pick away:

Alex Mack (21st pick, 1st round)
Percy Harvin (22nd pick, 1st round)
Clay Matthews (26th pick, 1st round)
LeSean McCoy (53rd pick, 2nd round)
Max Unger
William Moore

Matthews paired with DeMarcus Ware might've made for a nice combo on defense.
But who would've thought a guy born in that family could actually play football...huh?

I'll come clean....have I twisted this post into my own personal platform to rail on Jerry Jones and his parade of miscues?

Absolutely. Think about it.....not even the Ford family (Detroit) would hire him as their GM. And they kept Matt Millen on their payroll for 7 years!

[Prolongus]

GM wouldn't hire Jerry as the GM of their glory holes if they have them. You kinda have to know what those things are, lol.

Just think how befuddled Jerry would be if he showed up for work and they handed him a mop.

[TexasDave555]

Draft alone does not make a team win. With that said, the Draft does play a key role, but if you want any other proof that draft alone won't make a team, look at the Raiders, Houston and any number of teams who continue to have high draft picks. Raiders have traded draft picks in the past for vet talent true, but they have had lots of picks wasted. You mention all those picks Jerry has taken that have not panned out, well, the same thing would have occured if they had MORE. So, while playing the draft for more picks and maintaining your solid core of rounds 1-4 is critical, what it ultimately boils down to is picking the right talent and the right positions to draft. Cowboys have not done that since plastic hair was in town.

And yes.. I would say that winning a SB was easier in the 70s and 80s due to the salary issues primarily. This allowed teams to carry depth and carry veteran depth so when injuries did occur they had the exchange of parts handy. It was also a much less complicated game from a coaching and play angle. This meant you could have less intelligent players do well and showcase their talent. Today's QBs for example have to have much more going on between their ears than of yesteryear. Not to say the old guys were dumb as stumps, but for success today, your leaders on Offense and Defense need to be smart on and off the field. Pure talent does not to it by itself anymore.

[Shep3.0]

I think all of you missed Jerry Jones's mission statement.

"I will become richer. I will build the most valuable sports team in NFL and all sports. Oh I don't care if I win as long as I make money"

He is winning. #5 most valuable sports team in the world and #1 NFL team.

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mli45...las-cowboys-2/

He don't give a damn about a record or winning a game. He wants the largest sports team cash cow.

My .02

[Randall Creed]

The point I think you're skating over, TexasDave, is that a team can pick early 100 times over, but you still gotta pick the RIGHT players. Oakland picking bums like Jamarcus Russell doesn't do them any good, nor does picking WR's and DB's every year. They're always picking early because they don't know what the hell they're doing. Cleveland, too. Couple other teams. So, picking early, and picking wrongly while doing it, doesn't mean a hill of beans because the management sucks. Oh, and they fire coaches every year, too.

Winning teams in the 70's picked last every year. Dallas, Pittsburgh, Minnesota. They had great players all over. You gotta have people that know what they're doing. And they didn't have the benefit of widespread free agency, either. Couldn't wait for contracts to expire because of no cap to put imposing spending limits on players. The best players stayed with their original teams for 10 years or so, and only left when they were washed up and backup material.

It's all about who you got in personnel. Either coaching or player level. At least ONE of these levels, there has to be some measurable excellence. This Dallas team has none. Jerry's an idiot. Garrett's an idiot. The team is weak and fragile (watch, 15 starters will miss half the season or more). All that means no winning.

[EZ.]

Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

It's all about who you got in personnel. Either coaching or player level. At least ONE of these levels, there has to be some measurable excellence. This Dallas team has none. Jerry's an idiot. Garrett's an idiot. The team is weak and fragile (watch, 15 starters will miss half the season or more). All that means no winning.

The old saying: Lead, follow, or get the hell out the way. Jerry is an idiot and he won't get out of the way. Again, Rob Ryan is the perfect example. Look what he did for the Saints last year. Think Sean Payton wasn't excited to see Dallas fire him? He had him signed in less than a week.

[TexasDave555]

Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

The point I think you're skating over, TexasDave, is that a team can pick early 100 times over, but you still gotta pick the RIGHT players. Oakland picking bums like Jamarcus Russell doesn't do them any good, nor does picking WR's and DB's every year. They're always picking early because they don't know what the hell they're doing. Cleveland, too. Couple other teams. So, picking early, and picking wrongly while doing it, doesn't mean a hill of beans because the management sucks. Oh, and they fire coaches every year, too.

Winning teams in the 70's picked last every year. Dallas, Pittsburgh, Minnesota. They had great players all over. You gotta have people that know what they're doing. And they didn't have the benefit of widespread free agency, either. Couldn't wait for contracts to expire because of no cap to put imposing spending limits on players. The best players stayed with their original teams for 10 years or so, and only left when they were washed up and backup material.

It's all about who you got in personnel. Either coaching or player level. At least ONE of these levels, there has to be some measurable excellence. This Dallas team has none. Jerry's an idiot. Garrett's an idiot. The team is weak and fragile (watch, 15 starters will miss half the season or more). All that means no winning.

You obviously missed this...

So, while playing the draft for more picks and maintaining your solid core of rounds 1-4 is critical, what it ultimately boils down to is picking the right talent and the right positions to draft.

I also mentioned the coaching staff in the original post.... so you my friend are not reading my posts and just restating what I have said already.

[Guest050619-1]

I'm not nit-picking, but the "less intelligent players of those decades" remark cracks me up, Dave.....you are pulling our chains, aren't you? Anyways....

.....the "easier to win a Super Bowl in the 70's and 80's" is a hoot of a statement I want to address....how'd you come up with that conclusion?

From what I can tell, the salary cap / depth problems, etc is an issue ALL teams must contend with in the present day NFL....so it's a level playing field all 32 franchises adhere to, right? No one has an edge when it comes to those mandates. So, in a nutshell...getting to, let alone, winning a Super Bowl is no less complicated (or easier, for that matter) for any of today's teams (by comparison of the rules / issues of yesteryear's NFL).

Now regarding the "easier" statement per the NFL of the 70's / 80's, that's just a bunch of malarkey, Dave. If it was so easy, then why wasn't everyone doing it?

As a matter of historical record, only NINE franchises accounted for those 20 years of Super Bowl championships. That means 72% of the teams failed during that time span.

So if it was so much easier to win a Lombardi Trophy back then, how on earth did THIRTEEN teams (41% of the NFL) go two straight decades and not even make an appearance in the Super Bowl?

Originally Posted by TexasDave555

And yes.. I would say that winning a SB was easier in the 70s and 80s due to the salary issues primarily. This allowed teams to carry depth and carry veteran depth so when injuries did occur they had the exchange of parts handy. It was also a much less complicated game from a coaching and play angle. This meant you could have less intelligent players do well and showcase their talent. Today's QBs for example have to have much more going on between their ears than of yesteryear. Not to say the old guys were dumb as stumps, but for success today, your leaders on Offense and Defense need to be smart on and off the field. Pure talent does not to it by itself anymore.

[Falcondriver]

Perfectly said

[ampcramp]

The Cowboys wouldn't win the division if they were playing in the Dallas Independant School District.

[Guest050619-1]

Well, the NFL officially begins tonight; time to ice down your favorite beer and call for pizza delivery: Green Bay @ Seattle. Should be a good match up and entertaining game. From all accounts, Seattle looks razor sharp and ready to defend their title.

Keep an eye on the zebras tonight...see if they stay with the mandate to flag defensive holding when and where. If so, we could be on the way to watching games that last an additional 10 - 15 minutes or so. Ugh...

Moving closer to home......San Fran coach Jim Harbaugh had interesting things to say about Dallas during yesterday's media session; in particular, their defense. When asked, he remarked the Cowboys had assembled a number of players who had great speed, athleticism, etc...some "real playmakers" in his opinion. Half way through his answer, I began to wonder if he thought the question was to give his impression of the '92 / '93 Cowboy's defense. One thing for sure, he's not going to give Dallas any bulletin board stuff to get stoked up over fro this Sunday's game. As if that'd do any good.

The Niners have plenty of problems of their own right now with injuries and suspensions to key players; so they come into Jerry World somewhat wounded. And to compound things, Kaepernick and the 49er offense sputtered a bit during the preseason. This much I know, the Rx for an offense not hitting on all cylinders is to play a team with a non-existent defense......and Dallas serves that up on a silver platter.

Niners may end up rushing for 200+ yds vs this putrid Dallas front seven....and they might not even break a sweat in the process. If you have Gore, Hyde, Boldin, Crabtree, etc on your fantasy team, this is the week to load up on 'em. You have a great opportunity here and you may as well take advantage of it.

[Guest110416]

Speaking of the Cowboy's defense, I am glad they signed Micheal Sam, as he is going to be a fantastic pass rushing DE, he just needs to work on his run stopping. But, if he cannot make it work on this squad of C and D players, he is not going to make it anywhere.