News reached us yesterday that safety Mark Barron may have suffered a double sports hernia. Barron was projected as a likely first round pick for the 2012 draft, and the injury will probably see his draft stock drop. Early reports suggest he could be out until July or August, making it unlikely that he’ll have a big impact in the 2012 season. Cowboys fans immediately started penciling Barron in as a potential second round target for the Cowboys along with DE Jared Crick, who’s also seen his draft stock drop due to injury.
The thinking is that with either Crick or Barron, the Cowboys could get first-round talent with a second-round pick, and it’s conceivable that the Cowboys could indeed end up going this route. After all, they’ve used their last two second round picks on injured players with first round grades: Sean Lee and Bruce Carter. The Sean Lee pick appears to have paid off, but the jury is still out on Bruce Carter.
In financial investment circles, this is commonly referred to as a high risk/reward strategy, where the increased risk is rewarded with a higher potential return. The trick is finding the right balance in your investment portfolio, one that generates enough profit but is sufficiently diversified to absorb the losses from some of those high risk/reward choices that are bound to go bad.
But when a team like the Cowboys pick an injured player in the second round of the draft for the third year in a row, that is not a high risk/reward strategy, that is called ‘Casino Finance’: Casino Finance is used to describe situations where large "bets" or investments are made that carry a high risk and a potentially high reward, but where the investors may have little to no control over the outcome of their bets.
The issue here is that the Cowboys have consistently displayed a pattern of behavior that suggests they think they can outsmart the market, or in this case, the 31 other teams. That they can somehow take a shortcut to success in the NFL.
But in the NFL, there are no shortcuts. The teams who make the playoffs regularly and are contenders are those who draft well and develop their players. They draft the right players, hire the right coaches, call the right plays and sign the right free agents. That’s it. It’s not rocket science.
The teams that don’t do so well are typically always trying to find shortcuts to make them contenders. Here are the three most commonly used shortcuts, and the Cowboys are guilty of all three:
Money: No matter how much money an owner invests to win a championship, there is no guarantee on the return, and historically the success rate isn’t favorable. Look at the Yankees. Look at the Cowboys whose real payroll tops the league year after year. Look at last year’s Eagles. Look at the Redskins.
In real life, money is just about the biggest shortcut there is. Money gets you better everything: better seats, better health care, better service, better education, better everything. And nobody knows this better than every single multi-millionaire owner, all of them accustomed to throwing money at things to make them better. The supreme irony is that in the salary-capped NFL, money isn’t the difference maker anymore and simply buying yourself a better team isn’t an option – a concept that many an owner is still struggling with, almost 20 years after the cap was first introduced in 1994.
Think about how frustrating this must be for an owner like Jerry Jones: No team makes more money than the Cowboys in the NFL, no team consistently spends as much on player salaries and yet the success simply hasn’t been there in recent years.
Quick Fixes: There is little doubt that the NFL, like almost every other professional sports league, is a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately league. Nobody knows this better than the coaches and GM’s around the league front offices, whose jobs are on the line almost every single day. To keep their jobs, they must deliver results. And to deliver quick results, franchises try to build their teams too fast with quick fixes. As a result, their team has a lot of holes. No team is ever "one or two players away". From anything. In 2008, Jerry Jones believed the Cowboys were one wide receiver away from making the Super Bowl and signed Roy Williams. In 2000, Joey Galloway was supposed to be the guy to turn the Cowboys around.
And as much fun as it can be to belittle Jerry Jones at every opportunity and make this out as a Cowboys-specific problem, it is a problem that most franchises experience when they go 'all-in' for one player.
In the NFL, the talent level is too evenly distributed to think you can beat teams with talent alone. In fact, one of the biggest issues the Cowboys have is that the talent level on the roster is so unevenly distributed from one player to the next, that the holes in the roster are blindingly obvious and are easily taken advantage of by opposing teams.
Too many risks: Nowhere do you see teams take more risks than during the draft. In fact, it’s amazing how fast and loose teams play during the most important talent acquisition process of the year. Teams will regularly draft for need instead of BPA, draft potential over production, pick injured players, go for talent while ignoring character or select small school prospects over big school starters.
The Cowboys are particularly susceptible to the last point, the small school standout. The first player to fit this definition was defensive tackle Jethro Pugh out of Elizabeth (N.C.) City State in the 1964 draft. Since then, the Cowboys have had great success looking for talent in out of the way places, and have compiled an impressive list of small school talent that includes Hall of Fame OT Rayfield Wright out of Fort Valley State, soon to be HoF OG Larry Allen out of Sonoma State and numerous Pro Bowlers.
And while it’s great that the Cowboys found the likes of Tony Romo or Miles Austin, building your roster with undrafted free agents or small school prospects is not a sustainable strategy. The Cowboys should be happy they lucked out with these players but shouldn’t look for that kind of luck to repeat itself year after year.
Case in point, the 2010 draft: Of the 255 players drafted that year, 196 came from the six BCS conferences (+ Notre Dame). Another 36 were drafted out of the other Football Bowl Subdivision conferences. That left 23 players from out-of-the-way schools, of which the Cowboys picked two, fourth rounder Akwasi Owusu-Ansah from Indiana (Pa) and seventh rounder Sean Lissemore from William & Mary. They then made a point of going out of their way to sign high profile UDFA Scott Sicko out of New Hampshire - who didn't make it through camp with the Cowboys. Lissemore seems to have been a good pick, but Owusu-Ansah wasn’t.
AOA was selected with the 126th pick at the end of the fourth round. The next three DBs selected were Kam Chancellor out of Virginia Tech (133), Dominique Franks out of Oklahoma (135) and Kendrick Lewis out of Mississippi (136). Those three players have combined for 67 starts in two years, an average of 11 starts per season. AOA started two games for Jacksonville last year and never started for Dallas.
There is a risk inherent in selecting players who’ve excelled against inferior competition. The Cowboys obviously factor this into their draft evaluation, but the Cowboys’ talent acquisition history indicates that college pedigree may play a lesser role in Dallas than in other places.
Bill Belichick supposedly once said, "There are no shortcuts to building a team each season. You build the foundation brick by brick."
In the draft, safe picks are usually good picks. String together enough good picks and you’ve built a contender. Get too cute along the way and chances are you'll get a lot of picks wrong. If the Cowboys are going to be contenders, they’ll have to do it the old fashioned way.
There are no shortcuts.
6 recs | 133 comments
Great Article
Totally agree, and I think RHG agrees too. This last draft, they drafted more players from bigger schools (who play against big time competition), people who were captains, people who have strong character. I really believe that two more drafts and this team will be where Garrett wants it to be. If everyone can just be patient, including our owner….
CowboyzRule - February 10, 2012
2 drafts from now could mean 3 or 4 years from now before there real contributors.
if i read this correct Dallas has no strong spots of depth. we dont have the next man up roster like past champs in the salary cap era. the holes at the starting positions aren’t even strong in key positions.
the watch is ticking on DWare, Witten, Ratliff, Romo & 4 years from now (2016) those guys wont be at the same level they are now. i think OOc did great with the no shortcuts way & i agree 100% but this teams been built like that since 2006-07 & its alot easier to talk about fixing it then actually doing it. only 1 team can win it all & theres 5 or 6 every year that are capable.
DCNation73 - February 10, 2012
after last season Giants wouldn't have been considered in the 5-6 group, so......
Terry - February 10, 2012
Yeah, this article is pretty much the angle I'm coming from when I talk about draft strategies.
As mentioned below, Mark Barron is a “Delay on Investment” risk as a sports hernia isn’t career threatening and his game tape speaks for itself.
A guy like Vontaze Burfict is this “Casino Finance” kind of risk and Dallas needs to stay away from that for a stretch because we are so utterly deficient. We don’t just need more star players, we need more meat and potatoes as well.
Star players, by their nature, are a small percentage of your overall roster and will never be able to standout if not surrounded with enough consistency. We have a lot of areas that need to be upgraded with solid to outstanding talent. Due to that, we need to dial down the risk, not play fast and loose, and get some guys in here that measure high on contribution potential because there really is no shortcut. A team like the Packers can afford to take a risk on a guy like Burfict, not us.
pjohn56 - February 10, 2012
I'm in favor of taking Barron in the second round
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
so would I...that's a really minor risk and well worth taking in the 2nd imo
pjohn56 - February 10, 2012
If he is ready to work out for teams before the draft I doubt he falls to the 2nd.
Rena - February 11, 2012
Patient?
3 years, 5 years, or until JJ quits?
stubabe - February 10, 2012
Bill Belichick also said,
“point the camera in that direction”
beWARE94 - February 10, 2012
I personally think
that had more to do with Josh Daniels than Belicheck; Daniels got busted doing it again while the head coach of Denver
AustonianAggie - February 10, 2012
beWare that deserves a rec
DarkKnight88 - February 10, 2012
thanks
are you in the Bay area? I noticed your profile has bay area teams
beWARE94 - February 10, 2012
grew up in the Sacramento area 916 stand up lol
DarkKnight88 - February 10, 2012
beWARE94
Love your sig.
stubabe - February 10, 2012
thanks
its a quote i’ve always liked and seen proven true too many times in my life haha
beWARE94 - February 10, 2012
best post of the year OCC...well done
0k - February 10, 2012
Wish the Cowboys front office would read this!!
Good stuff OCC
Antonio S - February 10, 2012
Amen on the sins...
But back to the Barron thing (and its ties with the Lee and Carter strategy.) If the medical prognisis is good, I’m not sure this falls into the high risk/reward “Casino Finance” category so much as something like “delay on investment.” You’re looking to get value and are able to delay gratification and take a longer-term view. I think this actually has merit and, at times, may be the smart thing to do.
Obviously, you do your homework (prognosis), but if it checks out- it seems like a prudent risk to consider Barron in the 2nd.
This assumes you’re using “Casino Finance” in a bad way…
Cowtoys - February 10, 2012
"delayed return on investment" above
Cowtoys - February 10, 2012
It really does look good when you think hey im getting 2 first round talent
But the last two years yes we have gotten two first round talent but we loss a starting second round talent each year also. So this can be done with coaches and staffs that are secure in there job cause this puts you one starter behind each year. So if Garrett is in a must win to keep job scenario then he can’t afford to do this. If he thinks he has a few years to build his team this strategy works.
Sado44 - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Yeah, I think OCC's post here simply doesn't make sense.
We did not try to outsmart 31 teams—we took what all of the scouts were saying, and made decisions that all of the scouts agreed were smart moves. We just happened to find, when it was our turn to draft, that the best value came for guys whose IMMEDIATE contribution wouldn’t be there. These players had a body of work that made them, relatively, a pretty safe bet. Lee is doing just fine, and Carter looks good for this coming season. (He may not do as well as I expect, but when is that NOT a possibility?)
In other words, in this one limited situation, under JG, I have difficulty seeing what the quibble with our draft strategy has been. (Larger issues from past years are another issue.) If Barron falls because of health, that’s one among many considerations in finding the right guy at the right draft pick. It’s hardly a “shortcut.”
boyman - February 10, 2012
I think OCC's point is that the odds are starting to pile up.
With an injury history, there is a percentage likelihood that it will not work out. Although hard to quantify, assume it is 35% that the player will not pan out. A 65% chance of success is not a bad bet – but if you make that same bet three times running, you are getting to the point where you are statistically almost certain to fail on one of the picks. Keep going back to that well, and it will bite you eventually.
Here, the medical prognosis is key, IMO. If it says that he is 90% likely to have a full recovery, then the odds change. If it is more like 50%, then spend that pick somewhere else.
Tom Ryle - February 10, 2012
The Pats with so many picks could draft him and afford to wait it out.
Dallas isn’t in that position. They need rightnow talent. Look at the ilb position opposite Lee. It was terrible. Yet we had to endure below sub par play because Jerry wanted to wait on Carter. And the jury is still out. Now we have to play a whole season with Carter to see if it was worth it. If he isn’t back to square one and a wasted year.
football mensa - February 10, 2012
Mark Barron Injury
I would like to offer a word of caution on the reports of Barron’s injury. The only person who reported this is Joe Everrett from RookieDraft.com and he did it through twitter and they are not reporting it on their website. Now I like Joe and the work he does but he is not exactly a football insider. As of right now the injury and it’s extent is speculation. Mark, his agent nor Vince McConnell his personal trainer and coach have confirmed any of this yet.
Birddog26 - February 10, 2012
well i wouldnt expect them to actually release that information until they have to.
he could be getting several opinions & that takes time. his agent/lawyer will control when the offical public statement about the situation.
the fact his agent hasn’t come out & shot down the speculation probably means its very possible
DCNation73 - February 10, 2012
I am offering a word of caution
Other than the original tweet the only one’s reporting this is BleacherReport and the SB Nation blogs. No major media has picked up on it. Not even the papers in Alabama where he is training.
Birddog26 - February 10, 2012
Have you heard any denials?
accidental innuendo - February 10, 2012
I am in no way calling out the validity of Everrett's report
But this morning I recieved a notification from the UofA setting their Pro Day for March 7th and listing Barron as a full participant.
Birddog26 - February 10, 2012
oh snap
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
The time does not add up either for rehab
I have known a number of players who have had this and had surgery for the Gilmore’s (double hernia) injury. With this injury you are looking at after surgery being ready to play within 4 to 6 weeks. The worst I saw was 10 weeks till they played again.
Birddog26 - February 10, 2012
With that six to 10 week time table
We’re talking Mid March-Early April.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
And once again BD casts the cold light of fact and reason on the situation.
I love, you, man. (No homo.)
Tom Ryle - February 10, 2012
But you still can't have his beer.
Rena - February 10, 2012
Maybe all the facts aren't out and it's worse than being prognosticated.
football mensa - February 10, 2012
Dan Shonka of ourlads.com
was on the radio in San Diego yesterday and mentioned the Barron hernia.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Having said that
I’ll take the caution Birddog is expressing.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
I think SI confirmed the surgery today
Archie Barberio - February 10, 2012
As I said, I am not wanting to question the validity of the report
But the total rehab time does not make any sense at all. That is why I am saying be cautious with the report. I do not think it affects his draft stock at all.
Birddog26 - February 10, 2012
Birddog
Profootball talk is reporting the story as well, and they’re saying the recovery time is 8 weeks, which falls in line with the 6-10 week window for recovery you gave above. Here’s the link:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/10/top-safety-barron-expected-to-miss-combine-following-surgery/
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
IMO even if it is valid and he has a reparable hernia it still does not affect his stock.
Not as much of a risk as, say, Carter.
I think the Cowboys are doing a pretty good job. If anything, the teams drafting before us will know we would be interested in Barron and feel more confident drafting him based on our staff’s recent success.
BlueNSilverBlood - February 11, 2012
I'd discount anything on the Bleacher Report unless it's confirmed somewhere more
reputable.
Fernie67 - February 12, 2012
As a general principle, I'd have to consider the relative weakness of the injured players' positions before
committing a high draft pick for him. In Baron’s case can we afford to pick him in round 2 with the situation currently in the secondary. We need someone to contribute next year, not to mention bypassing a second round corner. Same situation for Crick, except that we are not as bad at the front 5 as we are in the secondary.
We need signifiacant contributers, if not starters, in the first and second rounds. Another pick for the future lessens the window for our current core stars to bring home the Lombardi. I’d love to get a bargain in the second, but I also want to win next year.
pfloyd1 - February 10, 2012
Let me counter with
there are no guarantees. If the BPA that you have rated as a 1st rounder is there in the 2nd because he’s dinged up but is projected for full recovery, you’ve got to strongly consider it.
We differ on our outlook for next year so I’m looking at things with a different set of assumptions.
Cowtoys - February 10, 2012
I see your point.
There are more factors than just blindly picking a player rated more highly who drops because of injury. I’m not opposed to Barron, but we must consider other second round CBs and Pass Rushers, as well as the narrowing window for our core players to win it all.
pfloyd1 - February 10, 2012
Agreed on the many factors,
Not saying you do it knee-jerk, all the time, every time.
I gotta say I’m proud of the ’boys for their second round picks the last couple of years. Being open to this shows a patience and maturity that I thought was missing.
Gosh, maybe our little Jerry is growing up, lol…
Cowtoys - February 10, 2012
i see the front 7 in worse shape then the secondary.
theres 10 QB in the NFL that are accurate enough to beat any CB in the league (i know Revis is gr8 but he can be beat if the QB has time to the dime pass). i dont care how good your secondary is if you dont have the pressure on the QB then those guys will pick you apart.
sure its great to have DBs that can cover but if the pass rush doesn’t get the QB off his mark fast enough your DBs will lose the battle.
if you the QB is the most important position the counter is the pass rush.
DCNation73 - February 10, 2012
I disagree the front 7 is in worse shape
Our front seven has three elite players in Ware, Ratliff and Lee, we just need to upgrade the DE position and the other OLB position.
That being said, I do agree that having a great pass rush is better than having a great secondary. Pressuring the opposing qb and stopping the run are two things any really good must do consistently well.
Terry - February 10, 2012
Ratliff is not elite anymore.
Which actually makes the front seven even more needy. Terrible job by the gm stocking this team. All because of his infatuation with wr’s.
football mensa - February 10, 2012
???
I don’t really get it. OCC -are you saying the Cowboys were trying to take a shortcut when they drafted an injured Bruce Carter? It seems they were doing just the opposite since they realized when drafting him that he would not be able to play in 2011.
Are you saying getting undrafted free agents is luck? Taking a short cut? Again it seems at least to me it’s the opposite. You take undrafted players or draft players from small schools because your willing to take the long road and develop these players. Granted not every player is going to work out. That shouldn’t mean you don’t take chances. Larry Allen would have never been on the team if your not willing to take chances.
The teams who avoid going after small school players or avoid undrafted players are taking the win today approach.
Maybe I’m missing something in the article but it seems every reason you gave paints the picture that the Dallas Cowboys are one of the best teams in the league at recognizing the long term value in player acquisitions.
livemontana - February 10, 2012
15 years and counting..how much longer can ya wait?
0k - February 10, 2012
ask a Bill's fan :)
livemontana - February 10, 2012
How long is Jerry going to be GM?
That’s how long we’ll have to wait.
DIRE WOLF - February 10, 2012
My point is that the Cowboys have consistently displayed a pattern of behavior that suggests they think they can outsmart the market. Their track record suggests that they can’t.
One.Cool.Customer - February 10, 2012
well first let me way you win any argument by living in Hawaii :)
Every team tries to outsmart the league. That’s the point of making a draft pick or signing a free agent. You can’t wait until another team beats you to it. One shot – you step and sign the person/make the pick or that’s it.
Wouldn’t you agree that during the last few years the JJ team has not made any roster moves that would be deemed as trying to be short term fixes?
I understand you can go back many years to point out some mistakes And for every bad move you would also have to agree they made some big ones that did work out: Deion Sanders & Charles Haley.
But more than anything we’re rehashing stuff that is year’s ago at this point. Even JJ has said on more than one occasion those were mistakes (Roy Williams/Joey Galloway).
I’m definitely digging the new approach they are approaching with developing long term. It might not have done as much as we hoped last year but you can’t take long term approaches and then complain when it doesn’t work in the short term….
livemontana - February 10, 2012
If I may OCC -
that’s the " JJ process".
stubabe - February 10, 2012
I just don't see this.
I listened to the reports from other scouts/ teams when we got Lee and Carter. The consensus was, “smart pick, the other teams had these guys rated high too, the Cowboys are simply showing more patience than some of the other teams, who don’t want to wait for rehab.” Calling this sort of patience “shortcut thinking” only works in a parallel universe.
boyman - February 10, 2012
Joey Galloway trade was how many years ago?
And didn’t the Patriots sign a couple of veterans last year who basically contributed nothing (Albert Haynesworth & Ochocinco)???
livemontana - February 10, 2012
they didnt give very much in return for them
DCNation73 - February 10, 2012
it's hilarious that fans can't let go of something that far back
I don’t know what you do for a living but have you not learned something in the last 5-10 years that makes you better at what you do today than that far back?
I don’t mind criticizing bad moves but it doesn’t make sense to go back more than the most recent years.
livemontana - February 10, 2012
+1
yehti - February 10, 2012 via mobile
i cant see how they have the luxary of drafting anymore players to put on the shelf for a season
i mean if Barron fell to the 4th round i might think about it if they were 100% he’d be ready next season. the only first round talent i would draft in the 2nd round & put on the shelf for a season would be Luck. RGIII & Maybe Claiborne but Dallas needs to hit home runs on the frst few rounds
DCNation73 - February 10, 2012
the 4th?
That’s a little extreme there. He’s certainly worth more than a 4th, even injured. All draft picks are at some level “futures” assets. If you make sure you’re getting talent from many sources, you never know where you’ll get contribution. For most every team they have years that have no contribution from their 2nd round pick, so don’t see it being a situation where it should make or break a season.
ary201 - February 10, 2012
Nice post, but I do not agree with your assessment of risk
Bruce Carter’s injury led to an ACL reconstruction. While I believe no surgery is minor, the ACL surgery and subsequent rehabilitation has been refined to have a very high success rate as measured by return to work: which in this case is professional football player.
Jared Crick suffered a fractured bone in his lower extremity. It is relatively easy to verify that the bone is healing appropriately with the imaging avaliable: a simple x-ray is often all that is needed. The rehabilitation primarily involves strengthening and reestablishment of the person’s proprioceptive sense.
As with an ACL reconstruction, a bone fracture is not an injury that carries a significant chance of limiting a career as a professional football player. On the other end of the spectrum are congenital conditions of the spine.
If the Cowboys were to select a defensive back with a congenital narrowing of the spinal canal (termed a stenosis), Dallas would be taking a great gamble. Not only is this condition difficult to manage (it would require surgery if symptomatic), but it could lead to paralysis or even death.
This would truly be casino finance. A congenitally narrow spinal canal ended Michael Irvin’s Hall of Fame career.
I view what Dallas is doing in selecting specific injured players as a sound long-term investment for less. It is essentially the opposite of a “quick fix” scheme.
Remember that the Giants drafted Manningham later due to his injury issues. Canty, a former Cowboys player, was also taken later in the draft because of injuries sustained in college that limited his productivity. Jerry Rice had an ACL reconstruction, did not follow approriate rehabilitation protocols (and had a flawed surgery) and fractured his knee cap (patella) later that season. He continued to play at a high level after that season and made it to a Super Bowl.
If Barron has a first round grade, falls to Dallas in the second round, and the Cowboys have him as the highest rated prospect on the draft board, the right move is to draft him. Same would go for Crick, or any other collegiate athlete that has a history of injury that is similar to the ACL example given above.
Thanks for presenting the opportunity to publicly respond.
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
Understand your reasoning and generally agree SO, but would you draft Barron in the first if he were injured
assuming before the injury he would have been BPA at #14. Injuries must factor into BPA when considering a player. If you pick him in the second based on projected potential relative to the injury, I’m fine with that, but you must consider the other players, namely the CBs and pass rushers you are bypassing, who are healthy and can contribute immediately.
pfloyd1 - February 10, 2012
Good question.
I do not rank prospects, so I generally base my opinions on the several sites available that do rank prospects. One of my favorites is Wes Bunting (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/scouting_department.html).
Wes has Barron ranked as the 15th best prospect in the upcoming 2012 NFL draft. If Dallas drafts at 14, and Barron is the highest ranked player on their board, the Cowboys should draft him at 14. A double sports hernia (if he truly has suffered this injury) should not deter a team from drafting a good prospect.
Now all sorts of games occur in the draft. Teams generally have a feel for what the other teams are interested in drafting. If the Cowboys gather information making them believe that Barron may fall to the 45th spot, then I am OK with Dallas gambling with their pick and selecting their next highest ranked prospect and waiting (and hoping) for Barron to fall.
Bunting has Barron ranked on par with Dre Kirkpatrick and Peter Konz. Considering that both of those players fill positions of need and are highly rated, I could easily see Dallas gamble, select Konz/Kirkpatirck, and wait to see if Barron falls.
Then Jerry would once again say that he feels that the Cowboys drafted two first round talents in the 2012 NFL draft. Not a bad thing.
What do you think…Doc? This is more up your alley. I am just a dude with a laptop.
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
I'd have no problems taking Barron
Considering he’d be able to participate in training camp and pre-season.
It’s not like we’d have to wait a full season before seeing what he can do.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
If he is really hurt,
no way i take him at 14…..in the second round, maybe, but no way at 14
BigBad Joe - February 10, 2012
This whole discussion is about taking him in the second rd
Btw, the recovery time from his surgery is 8 weeks. Meaning the earliest he can work out for a team is mid April before the draft.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/10/top-safety-barron-expected-to-miss-combine-following-surgery/
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
I think the thing is
that the injury should be considered a factor is evaluating a player. But there are many factors to weigh. The point is an injury like this shouldn’t drop your evaluation of a player as much as others. It should still drop a player some, because it effects the player’s ability to develop quickly, but the team shouldn’t go out its way to avoid selecting him.
ary201 - February 10, 2012
agree with your logic but
Barron is a first round pick who draft stock is going to fall because of this injury, but we consider ourselves contenders don’t we want to try and bring in a player that can help immediately. Our core players aren’t getting any younger that window is closing, I just feel like we can’t afford to do this for the third straight year, we have too many holes to fill this year.
Ihatethesaints - February 10, 2012
I am more on the side of what the Cowboys have done.
Expand this thinking to free agents. Mario Williams sustained a pectoral injury in 2011. Should Dallas shy away from signing him because of the injury?
By the way, I think Sturm missed a very obvious point in his column today (http://sturminator.blogspot.com/). More on this later.
How about Terrelle Thomas (CB, NYG)? He was injured last off season and should be healthy this season, but he may not be at 100% until 2013.
As OCC mentioned above, “No team is ever ‘one or two players away’. From anything.” I completely agree with this premise. Therefore, it is short-sighted to acquire talent with that mindset. The secret in today’s NFL is to enter playoffs healthy. Since good health is difficult to control, I consider it an uncontrollable variable.
Getting great players and patiently developing them with an eye on more than the upcoming season is good business sense. The early turn of the century, 2008, and 2010 should have taught all associated with the Cowboys that nobody is only one or two players away.
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
well said
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
the problem I have with the Cowboy's is
the first 3 picks need to be day 1 starters…offense or defense…out with old in with the new makem play and hope they get better by the end of the season….not to mention the UDFA’s…which hopefully they find 2 day 1 starters as role players …like FB…special teams gunners…and they definitely need a returner for punts and kicks
0k - February 10, 2012
I don't see how Mark Barron
Can’t win the job by the end of training camp? He’s only out (if injured) until the end of July. He’d be back and ready to go by T.C.
This most likely is not the Bruce Carter scenario from last year.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
I don't see how you can see that
“the first 3 picks need to be day 1 starters.” That seems completely arbitrary and unrealistic.
ary201 - February 10, 2012
I was thinking the same thing.
First round, I can see. After that, you don’t have to have an immediate starter for it to be a good pick. See: Lee, Sean. Also Murray, DeMarco.
Tom Ryle - February 10, 2012
Barron (if injured) should be ready to go by training camp
If we took him he could still learn the plays during rookie camp and otas before TC starts.
He should be able to play in pre-season and regular season barring any set backs.
Maybe he won’t start right away, but I don’t see why he wouldn’t be able to win the job by say mid season.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
I chose to lead in with the example of injuries, perhaps that has now narrowed the discussion too much to injuries alone.
I work for a company that prides itself in being very entrepreneurial. They constantly tell me how willing they are to take risks, and that they reward risk-taking. But what they really mean is that they want above average returns without the downside of risk. And they will fire you if a risky project actually fails.
Today, everybody loves the Sean Lee pick. But should he have another ACL tear on the same knee, the tedious ‘Jerry sucks’ crowd will go into orgasmic overdrive.
In the end, it’s a numbers game. You simply cannot consistently maintain a higher risk level than all your competitors and consistently get higher returns.
One.Cool.Customer - February 10, 2012
OT- OCC, I love the lip service to risk-taking too
I’ll believe it when I see the following:
“Johnson here headed up the R. Williams project which, as we all know, was a spectacular failure. However, he was an excellent project manager with many innovative ideas that those of us providing managerial oversight believed were right on target at the time, despite the risks involved. Therefore, as per our core-value statement encouraging risk-taking, Johnson is being rewarded with a handsome bonus, even if those of us in upper management have to take it out of our own hide.”
Cowtoys - February 10, 2012
Not all franchises are created equal.
The Cowboys have arguably the best strength and conditioning coach in the NFL. Dallas also has an excellent medical staff. I believe that Britt Brown is still in charge of the rehabilitation.
Despite the big money in college football, there are very few programs that develop their athletes physically to a point that is even comparable to what is done in the NFL. Most of this is because college athletes are not professionals that can spend countless hours studying film, working out, and practicing. A significant part, however, is that strength coaches in college are not the best qualified individuals to hold those particular positions at most universities.
Therefore, college kids coming out to the NFL frequently need to physically develop to be competitive in the pros: look at Arkin, which could parallel Free’s progress. Teams that invest in their strength and conditioning/rehabilitation departments may be taking fewer risks than other teams due to allocation of resources within the franchise.
I believe that this is what Dallas does. It is an advantage that permits the team to pursue injured players that have greater talent than where they are drafted.
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
Would have to agree 100%
Birddog26 - February 10, 2012
I was hoping you would chime in.
If I may be so bold, could you post something on your experience with different strength programs in college? I thoroughly enjoy reading your posts and would welcome your perspective on the differences you note on coaching and conditioning.
I have a friend who worked with the previous North Carolina football administration, and he noted that Coples, Paige-Moss, and other Tarheels would struggle this season becuase of the drop-off in coaching the players received in 2011. Personally, I have worked with strength coaches and rehab staffs, and some are using archaic methods that actually retard the progress of many athletes.
It is amazing that football programs that make money for universities do not allocate resources to obtain a great strength and conditioning coach. Most have ex-athletes that have very little (if any) formal training in modern strength training.
Some NFL teams have archaic beliefs guiding their strength and conditioning programs. It is much more predominant in college, however, from what I have seen.
Your input always invited and welcome Birdog26.
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
Yup
This in turn minimizes what another team might deem as a high risk move.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
It's not that I did not read the entire article...
But rather that I agreed with your other points. Washington, Philadelphia, Dallas, and so forth, head the list of teams that tried to buy championships and failed. Drafting many small school products, that are in small schools because big school recruiters felt they were not good enough to go to their big schools, is an inherently flawed strategy.
A gem can be found from time to time, but it should not be the crux of the draft. I feel that Dallas will not continue to draft a lot of small school guys now that Wade is gone.
I also agree that taking more risks than everyone else is not a good strategy. The only thing I did not agree with was your blanket statement on drafting injured players. Afterall, Cincinnati drafted Pollack (DE/OLB) from Georgia in the first round some years ago. He was a pass rushing demon for the Bulldogs and did not have a significant injury history.
Pollack never made it through his first contract due to a severe neck injury. He is now an analyst on ESPN Gameday. I believe that injury history is not a good indicator of future performance.
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
I didn’t mean to be snarky or anything, it’s just that if I were to write this piece again, I’d probably leave Barron out completely and perhaps start with the AOA example.
I myself struggle with this whole injury thing. Players are routinely downgraded for being ‘injury prone’ in college. But there is no quantifiable basis for what injury prone is. Number of injuries, severity of injuries, soft tissue injuries only, what?
From a purely mathematical standpoint, let’s give the Cowboys medical staff the benefit of doubt and assume that in their care, a player with a previous injury has a very good 95% probability of staying healthy. But if you take three players with the same probability in successive drafts, the probabilty of all three staying healthy drops to 85% (0.95*0.95*0.95). Depending on the probabilities you’re working with, it’s only a question of time until the cumulative probability drops to a point where you’re reduced to Casino Finance.
One.Cool.Customer - February 10, 2012
Did not interpret your comments as snarky.
Why would you rewrite this to make it LESS controversial? Discussions are more fun when two sides have valid opposing viewpoints.
I agree that downgrading a player because of injury concerns occurs too frequently. It is an inherent weakness in the process of talent evaluation. I feel Dallas should take advantage of this mistake a number of teams make.
I do not see injuries as equal. In fact, medical research shows that it is impossible to clump more than one specific diagnosis within a well defined population and get vaild and/or reliable results. Therefore, it is practically impossible to place a mathematical equation (such as probability) across more than one unique injury situation.
Look at Peyton Manning’s situation. The limiting factor to him returning to his previous level of performance is not the single-level fusion that he had done after multiple discetomies. Rather, the variable that is impossible to measure is the return of his arm strength.
There are over two dozen players (most are defensive backs) that have had a single level fusion in their neck currently playing in the NFL. The surgery itself is generally successful in permitting players to return to their previous level of performance. In Peyton’s case, however, he may have waited too long and suffered nerve damage.
Had Manning’s upper extremity symptoms disappeared following the surgery, Peyton would be the top free agent acquisition (for the Washington Redskins, of course) of the 2012 off season. If you were to put a percentage on Peyton’s ability to return solely based on the fusion, it would be close to 100%. Due to the confounding factor of arm weakness, however, he could very well be done.
Which makes him even a more perfect pick-up for the Redskins…
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
There’s the death knell. For Whom The Bell Tolls.
tanstaafl - February 10, 2012
Here's the problem with saying that injury was
“only one example.” It’s that the injury example (Lee, Carter, and possibly Barron) are relevant to our current leadership (JG) and your other examples are not. There are no examples of JG trying to “buy” a championship. There are not even examples of highly overvaluing small-school guys like AOA—in the JG era.
Now, admittedly, we don’t know a lot about the JG era, because it’s still so new. But if we look at the last couple of drafts, we see some major patience, not least in taking guys that all the teams were ranking highly and whose injuries were 99.9% certain to heal. I think that this evidence has little to do with AOA, Galloway, or other signs of impatience in the more distant past.
boyman - February 10, 2012
Not that anyone can forget...
But the GM that oversaw all of the afore mentioned moves is still in office.
ScarletO - February 10, 2012
You want only examples from the JG era?
Money/Quick Fix: Less than a year ago, the Cowboys came thisclose to signing Nnamdi Asomugha.
Small School: David Arkin out of Central Missouri State taken in the fourth
One.Cool.Customer - February 10, 2012
not sure our Med staff is all that great
after watching the last few years
burmafrd1944 - February 10, 2012
Nnamdi's 2011 performance needs to be taken with a grain of salt
1) He played for a team that promoted an oline coach to run the defense.
2) Said oline coach turned defensive coordinator had Nnamdi playing out orf position.
If you watched Nnamdi play while he was a Raider, he always played one side of the field, he never covered guys in the slot (hence Victor Cruz torching him in the first Giants game). Nnamdi is the type of CB who uses the sideline to his advantage when tackling and covering. Playing himnin the slot, or off the receiver in zone, or as the Charles Woodson type free roaming DB negates his best attributes-he’s a press man corner, who jams guys at the LOS and takes them out of the play by forcing them out of bounds and keeping them out of the QBs vision for sideline throws.
Of course he was going to struggle on the Eagles when they changed up his responsibilities.
He should have pulled the Deion Sanders move and told the Eagles I don’t care about schemes, just give me a side of the field to cover and get the hell out of my way.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
lol Roh it would just be icing on the cake
had namdi brought his own comfy chair to the meetings
DarkKnight88 - February 10, 2012
lol
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012
Good response.
But 1) we didn’t (and haven’t for a few years) signed the big money guy, and 2) once again I think Arkin was more more or less projected as a 4th/ 5th round guy, and nobody thought they were outsmarting anyone.
In both cases, one could argue the EXACT opposite of your post: we took the more impressive athlete who wasn’t ready yet (Arkin) because we are patient; we passed on Nnamdi (despite a clear need for an elite corner) because we are patient. Neither move we actually made was impatient, and neither move we actually made had that much risk.
boyman - February 10, 2012
lol. We did not pass on Nnamdi. Nnamdi passed on us. Big difference.
But hey, I’ll be the first to break out in jubilant song if Arkin ever makes it. So that’s something.
One.Cool.Customer - February 10, 2012
Will you record it and post it to BTB?
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Be very afraid when a German breaks out in spontaneous song or dance.
One.Cool.Customer - February 10, 2012
I don't know OCC, this dancing German has worked out great for us
somebodyquiet - February 10, 2012
LOL Dirk's got some moves
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012
You obviously haven't been to an Indian wedding for fat aunts and uncles start dancing...LOL
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012
Only if it doesn't auto play. We can just not click on it. :P
Rena - February 10, 2012
Will it involve beer steins and lederhosen?
Tom Ryle - February 10, 2012
lol
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012
Dallas will likely need year 1 production from any 2nd round picks
AustonianAggie - February 10, 2012
if we’re going to contend next year
AustonianAggie - February 10, 2012
Jerry Jones loves to gamble on Speed in the 4th it seems
that what unites AOA and that 4th rounder QB/WR we drafted from Washington
AustonianAggie - February 10, 2012
Luv the post
The one thing that does piss me off is the fact they drafted AOA when Chancellor was available, this is the same Cam Chancellor that is teaming up with Earl Thomas to be one of the best young safety tandems in the nfl right now. It basically just comes down to our front office being too arrogant, and I’m guilty of this anytime I get in a argument with someone about the cowboys I ask them how many super bowls has your favorite team won. They go on to point out that you need to go get a time machine to see the last one in 1996, and they have a point we are now approaching two decades without a super bowl championship. Our front office needs to recognize this and stop looking at our past success, because 16 yrs is a long time to go without post season success. Change is inevitable and most the time it is for the better.
Ihatethesaints - February 10, 2012
+1
makes me sick to think that Chancellor could have been here instead of AOA
BigBad Joe - February 10, 2012
You've impacted the bulls-eye, OCC.
This is the essence of everything in the NFL. If the Cowboys can string together two more drafts where they hit on safe picks up and down the board, we should really be able to see the results on the field. Since defense is the farthest away, I’d like to see them concentrate on acquiring sure-tackling, instinctive football players that are natural to the position they’ve been drafted to fill. And it sure wouldn’t hurt to find a two or three elite playmakers in 2012 & 2013.
Rec’d.
White Wolf - February 10, 2012
Mark Barron fits your description, so does Bruce Carter
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Beat a dead drum.
All the teams in the NFC East are Front runners and Bully’s.. The Boys Used to be The Buly’s. Get some F#$king B#lls and beat the snot out of these guys. Man Up!!! Hold on almost everyplay like the Giants,. David Deihl acts like its the last biscuit ever in the basket. Bark like the Skins, and Stop folding like the Eagles when you are down in a game!
mansterback54 - February 10, 2012
Smart, Insightful, Article Mr. Customer
And your revelation about "… the talent level is so unevenly distributed… that other teams have no problems taking advantage… " is spot on. Whatever the JG “process” is, it better be 180 degrees different than the JJ process. At the risk of exhibiting bad behavior, Eatman has a column on DC.com “What the Giants victory means to the Cowboys”
(Feb. 6 ) which is for “Realist fans” only. Here’s a splash of cold water.
stubabe - February 10, 2012
Seems like it would depend on if you were half full or a half empty on this team.
I myself see it as half full. The coaches get a full off season to coach the talent we have up to another level.
Last year we were jettisoning players to get us under the cap so we could sign some quality free agents.
If we can get three quality starters on defense this unit will improve vastly.
The players we signed last year were just JAGs filling in until we could find better talent.
I have to admitt we did great getting players off the wavier wire last year.This is encouraging in that it looks like someone is awake in our scouting department.
Also we must scout our own team to evaluate which players have talent and which players were just holding down thier position untill we could find someone better.Example: can Nagy,Arkin.Kowalski,Lumpy,Dockery and Costa improve our O line?If not then it seems that we can’t draft BPA but are back to drafting for need.
There are too many holes to fill this year.I count seven new starters needed to be competative within our division and I don’t see us being able to fill all these needs with topnotch talent.
Lets hope we get lucky this leap year and find some gems like we did with Rayfield,Allen and Lett.
TCB Orange Dino - February 10, 2012
Great article
I’m wondering, “Are the Cowboys really smarter than everyone else”?
Or are they still paying too much for an unknown (injured and rehabbing) commodity?
Was anyone else lined up to snatch Lee or Carter before the Cowboys spent 2nd round capital or could the Cowboys have had both in a later round?
Jim Vance - February 10, 2012
I saw draft boards that had both players in the late 1st/ early 2nd range.
In both cases a well-rated player fell to us, and it was a position of true need, and both players are panning out just fine. (O.K., so it’s early to know with Carter, but all signs are fine so far.) So why turn this into a controversy and compare it to stupid moves from the past?
boyman - February 10, 2012
financial analogy is appropriate
The basic thrust of the article is correct. EVERY pick has a risk, but there are several types of risk and reward.
One type of risk is search and evaluation risk. Having the combine means that a lot of the risk has been minimized but so has the value of finding talent that noone else found. Dallas used to have a great advantage by scouting players from small schools that nobody looked at or in players from other sports. Now just about everyone has the same ability to find talent.
Not surprsingly when Dallas lost that advatange, the first dynasty ended. The second dyansty was founded on the idea that Dallas could PAY for talent. JJ found additional revenues from the stadium, local ads, etc. Not surprisingly the second dynasty went away with the salary cap.
The value of a draft pick is similar to a financial option, it really depends upon the underlyiing instrument. The draft charts try to capture that value as the difference in point valoue between early picks and the next pick is much greater than the difference of later picks and the next pick.
Yet, the true value of a draft pick is the talent that the team gets with the pick. The idea is to draft guy you like based on their skill sets that you need or want. Pick a guy with a draft pick too early and you pay an opportunity cost. The opportunity cost is the OTHER talent that you could have gotten with that pick. Simlarly wait too long and other teams can draft a guy you might want and you miss out.
Each pick has a risk, but earlier picks have less evaluation risk. Talent is distributed along a power curve, simillar to the vaunted bell curve. There are a few no-brainers and more and more of players with less obvious talent. Wes Buntin notes this in his ratings. There is one 9.0, three 8.5, a more as you go deeper in the draft.
One can generally get starter talent in the first three rounds. By the time you reach the fourth round, the players have some sort of flaw. They tend to be hit or miss, depending on the abiliity of a team to evaluate the flaw and to mitigate that risk. OCC notes several types of risk – injury concerns, small school bias, character etc
Trading draft picks have other risks. The rookie salary scale should minimize some costs, but until recently the earliest picks were OVER-VALUED. Good teams such as New England would trade down to get more draft picks to capture that excess value.
Then they would use multiple picks on the same positions. Portfolio analysis is the appropriate analogy here. There is less total risk in multiple picks than just one player. Drafting two players in the same postion minimizes the risk of missing on a single player. Dallas did this several years ago on CB with Jenkins and Scandrick, hoping one would hit.
Similarly, New England took advantage of another anomaly in the value of draft picks – the future draft pick. Just as the earliest draft picks were over valued, the future draft picks were UNDER-VALUED. One normally gives away another round to try to capture some of the time value of waiting another year.
A 4th rounder can be turned into a 3rd next year. The difference is a 4th rounder is hit or miss and the 3rd rounder should get you an eventual starter. The odds of finding startet talent in the later rounds is farily small so not getting a player in the later rounds is not a great loss. Trading it away for an earlier pick increases the odds next year
Later picks – 6th and 7th haved about the same talent level as UDFA. Yet the main advantage of late picks is that teams control the contract. UDFA get to choose which teams that they will try out with. Denver wanted Romo, but he chose Dallas as a better chance to make a team. If one remembers the depth chart for QB for Dallas that year one would understand.
Lastly one more concept of portfolio analysis comes into play. Don’t fixate on any one pick, but look at the entire draft. In order to do that, one needs to undertand the supply and demand for each pick for each position.
This year there are lots of guards. Yes DeCastro is the best guard in a quite a while but there are LOTS of guards. Same can be said for CBs this year. On the other hand there are few safeties. Looking at the entire draft one can help analyze whether one can pass on a given talent if the odds are good to get comparable talent later.
Dr-P - February 10, 2012
Well said. I agree with most of what you are saying.
Are you in favor of taking Mark Barron ahead of DeCastro?
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012 via mobile
first off awesome name
any name that is similar to my favorite drink( Dr. Pepper, AKA nectar of the gods) is totally cool
Second Off:
As the uDDoFA (unofficail Deputy Director of FanPost Affairs) I hereby authorize and encourage you to make use of the fanpost Area to expound on this….
I am Ironman!!! - February 13, 2012
Dr Pepper
I agree that DP is nectar of the gods, I don’t drink colas/caramel colored carbonated drinks very much; but when I do, DP is my choice.
Yet, the name is really simpler. My last name starts with the letter P and I earned my PhD more than a decade ago,
Dr-P - February 13, 2012
Baron or DeCastro
One should look at both the talent ratings from Buntin and the mock drafts. They do not exactly match. There are few non-OT OL drafted in the first round in any year.
I remember distinctly that Buntin gave FBs some very high scores but they are NEVER taken in the first round regardless of talent.
I think DeCastro is the guard equivalent to the Tyronasaurus last year. DeCastro is not just rated the best guard, but one of the highest rated of all players. There is a significant difference between the #1 and #2 players at guard. Yet we can get a decent guard in later rounds. Compare that to OT. OTs are over-valued in the draft, there will be 6-6 OTs taken in every first round each year.
Yet as a guard, 14 is about riight for the absolute best, I would be thrilled to get him. Having said that, I would consider trading down a few spots if he is available at 14 and pick up a 3rd round pick.
We have many needs and we could use the extra pick. There is risk in moving down as another team could draft DeCastro. I would be happy to get Konz if someone drafted him in the few spots we move down.
’
Konz + 3rd > DeCastro, IMO. We need some help on the OL, but it doesn’t have to be just a guard. There was a great post some time ago on the value of drating a center versus a guard. I think that Kowalski is going to be the starting center over Costa if we dont get a center this year, but both of them were UDFA themselves.
Frankly none of the safties excite me enough to use a first round.
Dr-P - February 10, 2012
As much as I want DeCastro, I tend to agree.
Take Konz or Glenn and get an extra 2nd or 3rd? Sign me up for that program. We get 4 possible starters.
StarloverinWNC - February 11, 2012
Great post.
Both on it’s own merits, and on the great thread it generated.
I think there is some evidence that the team is taking a more intelligent approach to fixing its issues. The last draft had a very interesting three player approach to improving the O line. The team got Tyron Smith in the first round, who gave them that day one starter and a guy with a seemingly tremendous future. Then in the fourth round, they went with a small school guy in David Arkin that they could possibly develop for the future, even with the handicap of the lockout, which certainly delayed his development. And in the seventh round, they did a sort of handcuff move, getting Bill Nagy from a known big school factory for O linemen for a bargain pick. That looks like a good way to combine the approaches and maximize the rewards. I hope to see more of that.
Tom Ryle - February 10, 2012
The reason we haven't won a championship in 16 years might have something to do with...
the way we’ve done in the draft, we didn’t draft real well while Gailey, Phillips and others were around but did draft well during Landry, Johnson and Garrett years. Great that guys like Romo, Miles and others have been able to step in. But guys like Witten build championships, 69th pick and 7 Pro Bowls? That’s what you get out of a top 10 pick if you’re real lucky.
There’s 53 players on the roster, chances are most of them are from BCS conferences and you’ll see a lot of schools you recognize on the championship team roster. You’ll see that this year and you saw it on all of our championship teams.
One of the reasons Demarco Murray did so well for the Cowboys… he played in front of 85,000 fans in Norman, OK. Not a huge step to play in front of 100,000 at Cowboys Stadium. A little different then David Arkin playing in front of 14,000 in Springfield, MO. No surprise he had trouble in pre-season.
scraig - February 10, 2012
The 2000-2002 Drafts
2000
2001
2002
I count 17 players drafted from BCS Schools in those 3 drafts. How come this team couldn’t win more than 5 games in any of those 3 seasons. According to your logic, all these guys should have put the team over the top.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012
The numbering was thrown off. Pay no attention to the numbers by the players names...I tried to put their overall pick but the system screwed it up.
Rohpuri - February 10, 2012
Ross and Bryant.....what could've beens.
Ross was superb. Dude could jump a route in a blink. Natural feel for the game. Another druggie.
Bryant had the whole package. He just didn’t like to be told what to do. Baffles me as to why a 21 year old would want to throw away such a lucrative career and be set for life by the time they are 30.
The 02 draft had the potential to be a team changing draft.
Tony Dixon …another pick I damn near kicked my tv. Dixon was a Jerry pick. Him thinking that he was smarter than everyone else. Then Jerry wouldn’t cut him when everyone knew he sucked.
At least Willie Blade had a cool name.
football mensa - February 11, 2012
yup dixon was terrible n everyone saw roy's true colors
when woodson called it quits.. That trade for Galloway really set up those dark dark days when the new decade rolled around.
DarkKnight88 - February 11, 2012
Jerry's biggest influence is always the HC being the GM, and the advice he gets from Stephen
Dave Campo was the head coach so you can see the value there. 2002 brought in Gurode and Williams who benefited from Bill Parcells. The 2003 draft brought in Newman, Witten and Brady so I guess you could say this team dug its way out of the basement by changing the head coach. Look how Wade Phillips benefited from those guy in 2007-09 when they were in the prime of their careers.
Wade looked like Campo more than Parcells and Garrett looks a lot more like Parcells, Johnson and Landry then Campo and Phillips.
Also, this is not just the picks but player development. Garrett did a great job with Dez and Lee which were actually Wade picks. The picks are probably only a small part of the problem.
Player development/coaching is the biggest influence I think. Great to hear Garrett has gone out to get yet another of his guys in Baker…
scraig - February 11, 2012
I doubt Wade had anything to do with Dez. That was Jerry all the way.
football mensa - February 11, 2012
Every team in the NFL is willing to play the risk/reward game.
We are just more familiar with Dallas than the others. Dallas has had their small schol and injury hits in the draft (Ware, Lee) and misses like AOA.
The draft is risky regardless, and where Dallas has been deficient is finding solid contributors in the 2nd through 5 rounds…and most of those misses are big school guys. we have to start finding guys that can play in those middle rounds.
death of the cool - February 10, 2012
Casino Finance?
As in Gambler’s Ruin or Fool’s Die?
tanstaafl - February 10, 2012
If you think about it, the Pats are big at playing with the draft for risk vs reward and delayed gratification.
They don’t take that injured player, but they trade the pick away for a higher round one the following year.
Isn’t that basically the same thing we did with Carter, except we carried him on the roster and paid him? He was said to be a 1st round talent we paid a 2nd round price for. Is it really that different from the Pats trading that 2nd rounder for a 1st the following year. Thus they don’t get “paid” for that 2nd round pick till they get a player the following year who has a 1st round grade.
Rena - February 11, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Blogging The Boys to post a comment.