AU-panther

You don't draft a QB to win now. If anything, it's the opposite, you sign a vet QB and draft a lineman to protect him. Nobody expects you to win with a rookie QB. The only way you save your job with a rookie is showing improvement over the season.

Not to be an apologist for Rhule but BC had 32 teams pass on him for multiple rounds. Why is that? He probably had the best college tape of any of the OT prospects. Why did 32 teams pass on him multiple times? It's because of arm length. So in fact, these scouts didn't "throw out the rules" or he would have been drafted before he was. Rhule would be better served by not always being so open with his thoughts. He would have been better served not saying anything or saying maybe they think BC's skillset is better served at guard, which would have came across as much more logical than just blaming arm length. With that being said, I would definitely give BC a chance there to see what he can do, but to act like Rhule is the only person in the league who factors in measurables to decide where to play a player is ignorant.

I like this logic, I just think you could possibly get OT3, C1, or possible a QB that you like by trading down. Also who do you consider OT3? Ekwonu?

So nobody wants a stopgap or a retread, but they don't want to draft a QB either. So what is the answer?

I'm not crazy about drafting a center at 5 or 6 or either, but with a trade down I would consider it. I could really see a tempting prospect for a need of ours falling to that 12-15 range. C1 (Linderbaum), OT3 (Ekwano?), QB2 and/or QB3 (maybe Correll or Howell)

I agree they are probably moving up for a QB. Maybe for Pickett, mabye the next 2 QBs are Malik and Correl. My only point is that there is a chance that a QB you like might be in that 12-16 range. I could see there being a good bit of variance among teams for the top 4-5 QBs. Howell, or any of them for that matter, could easily be QB2 on one team's board and QB4 on another.

It might not be a crazy gamble. If we are picking 6-8 chances are the top LT(Neal) is going to be gone. Even if they QB you are hoping for doesn't make it to the point you trade back to you might still get LT3 (possible Ekwonu) C1 (Linderbaum), or the first guard off of the board.

If there is a QB there that you like, that is expected to go in the range, you take the QB. if not If there is a LT there that you like, that is expected to go in that range you take the LT if not you take best player available that fills a need. Dream scenario: You fall in love and are correct about a QB that is expected to be the 3rd or 4th QB taken, and you trade down to that 14-16 range and draft your QB and pick up a 2nd round pick in the process that you use of the O-line. Not to get the UNC fans too excited but Howell could fit that scenario. Picket at 7 or Howell at 14 plus a 2nd.

But it’s not a 90% vs 30% argument, fans always overate the top of the draft. True numbers are probably closer to something like 55% vs 45%. People made the same argument about staying out and taking Derrick Brown, they were convinced there was some huge drop off after pick 8 where there were no more elite players.

Most of this fan base would have a fit if they spent a #1 pick on a QB a year after spending a top 10 pick on a QB. They would start whining some gibberish about needing to protect him or give him weapons.

So now its hypothetical...LoL

Do you honestly think that the team would have passed on a comparable cost LT in free agency that they felt was better at playing the one position of LT than Cam Erving because they felt Cam was potentially better at various positions instead of the one position of LT? The answer is they wouldn't have. With Elflein they probably did like some of his versatility because on game days most teams only have 7-8 o-lineman active to cover 10 starting and backup spots, because of this all teams value versatility in their o-lineman. Rhule talking about versatility was mostly coach speak when selling players to the media and fans. In reality the amount he values it in the actual selection process is probably pretty similar to other coaches. He just happens to talk about it a lot and naive fans run with it. Part of the reason he talked about it was there was nothing else to talk about it. You couldn't talk about their pro blows? nope How about their really high PFF scores? nope You could talk about their injury history. That isn't really a selling point though is it?

It was actually a topic somewhat in the podcast, they were discussing how much Brady was to be blamed. Of course, Rhule is ultimately responsible for both, but it was just a question asking which was his biggest mistep. Also the versatility crap was a bunch of coach speak. People are overthinking it. Someone thought Erving could play LT at a high level and they were wrong. Someone thought Elflein could play guard at a high level and they were wrong. They didn't pick a bad LT because they were looking for versatility, they picked a bad LT because they don't know how to evaluate. During the process they probably appreciate versatility, any coach would but the main reason they signed Erving wasn't because he was versatile, that might have been a bonus in their mind but they signed him because they thought he could play LT. I get it you want Rhule gone, a lot of us do, but it might not happen.

I'm not missing any point, it was just a question based on the podcast. Yes, both could be considered a weakness, I'm just curious what people considered the bigger weakness of the two.

Same question for you, would have better personnel decisions on the offensive side of the ball or better offensive staffing helped more?

What do you think would have helped him more, better OC or better QB and O-line?

I actually like a lot of what Ellis says and people should listen to the podcast, some of their comments about Brady were a bit surprising. Ellis is actually more even keel than most fans. Like he said, Tepper might have been wrong about Rhule, it happens. Not only do most first time hires not work out, when you think about it most HC hires overall don't work out. Would have a search committee helped the first time? maybe, maybe not. Rhule still could have been a candidate, Tepper might still have picked him. The Giants had a "football person" (DG) running their search and they wanted Rhule also. The biggest concern with Rhule going into it was his lack of NFL experience, and that looks to be true at this point. If Rhule ends up getting fired it will be because of his inability to address the QB position and the offensive line, specifically with his free agent acquisitions. The defensive side of the ball has actually been above average overall, their college evaluation will probably be ok relative to the rest of the league when we look back in a few years. Alot of us were very critical of the Teddy, Sam, Erving, and Elflein signings when they happened. If Rhule gets fired it will be because of those decisions.

Hackett definitely seems good on paper. I would be extremely happy with the choice, but the realist in my also knows that every year some "hot coordinator" gets a HC job and they often fail. Everyone keeps thinking in terms of two options, keep Rhule, Fire Rhule, but there could be a third. What if Tepper keeps Rhule unless he knows for sure he can get the next coach he wants? For example Tepper might be willing to make a change for Hackett, but if not you wait another year. I'm not saying that is what you should do, but sometimes when you fire a guy its dependent on who you have lined up to replace them.

Good and bad are relative terms. Seems to be a difficult concept for people around here.

It would not surprise me at all if some teams, us included, have similar grades on the top 1-2 QBs this year that they did on QBs 4 and 5 last year. That doesn't guarantee these guys will work out, but purely from an evaluation standpoint the situations are similar.

are you sure? Ranking all 32 NFL teams by record from 2000-2020 | List Wire (usatoday.com) Last 20 years Cowboys are 11th in winning percentage. Thats above average and includes all of the salary cap years. Even during the no salary cap years, the other teams didn't have the salary cap either. I'm sure he wasn't the only one with deep pockets.

People love to talk about how there isn't any consensus 1st overall type of QB, guess what? We don't ahve the overall 1st pick. This is a bad year to have the 1st overall pick and need a QB. Usually if you have the 1st overall pick you are hoping for a Luck or Manning type of prospect. There isn't that in this class. Last year if you were picking 12th you would have ended up with the 5th QB off of the board, this year year maybe the 2nd. There is a very good chacne thye could have similar type of scouting grades.

Since Jerry Jones has become owner of the Cowboys, how many teams have a higher winning percentage? How many have more Super Bowls? Not sure if he really proves the point you are trying to make. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that I hope Tepper, if he makes a change, decides to put qualified people in position to help conduct a search, but anyone thinking Tepper or any owner won't be heavily invested in the final decision is delusional. Also all of this talk about people who are "smart enough" is often said with hindsight. If we hire a "qualified" person and he picks a coach who doesn't work out, do we still get to say he is smart enough? Nobody wants to admit this but there is a little bit of luck involved, if there was a fool proof way to pick a head coach every team would have a good one. NFL coordinators can be good at NFL level Xs and Os, but sometimes struggle with running the team as a whole. College coaches can sometimes be good with the CEO aspect but struggle with the NFL level Xs and Os. EX NFL head coaches are usually EX because they were bad. How often do proven NFL level coaches really become available? Rhule felt like a boom or bust type of hire. You are hoping for that Jimmy Johnson type of hire. Right now, it's not looking like that. My guess is if we do decide to look for another head coach we'll take the opposite approach. Usually when a decision doesn't work people tend to try the opposite later. I could definitely see us going with a NFL level coach.

running the search and having final say is two different things. Like most coaching decisions, odds are Rooney ultimately decided, which is how most coaching searches go and anyone who thinks Tepper won't have the final say in the next coaching search is delusional. About the most you can ask for is for Tepper to put people in place to help him make the correct decision, and even if that happens there is no guarantee that it will be a successful pick.

What legitimate source said Colbert made the call for Tomlin and not Rooney?