Spade
Superstar
Week 1 2010 killed it for me. Still a decent player but that was beginning of the end. Now he a coach? Time flies.Shard was my man for a lil bit :magicry:
Week 1 2010 killed it for me. Still a decent player but that was beginning of the end. Now he a coach? Time flies.Shard was my man for a lil bit :magicry:
That was Romos fault tho. A shuffle pass with that little time left on the clockWeek 1 2010 killed it for me. Still a decent player but that was beginning of the end. Now he a coach? Time flies.
Goes higher than him. That was on Garrett. He was terrible at situational football in those days.That was Romos fault tho. A shuffle pass with that little time left on the clock
You're implying he's gotten any betterGoes higher than him. That was on Garrett. He was terrible at situational football in those days.
Henry aint Zeke. They went defense in the 2nd. So thats still 2 holes filled, just one of them aint right away.havent been in here, but figure might as well drop my thoughts on the draft:
- i highly dislike the elliot pick....think it was dumb as hell, a reach, and showed they listened to outsiders too much.....why and the hell would you take a rb with all the other needs on the team?...especially since you signed the rb from washington...if they wanted another rb, cool, take one later (which they did, so they drafted 2 rbs, smh), but not with the 4th pick....they shouldve taken ramsey at 4...then taken henry in the second rd...that's 2 holes filled/set for the next 5-10 years....
...that's all i got from the draft...i stopped paying attention to it after the elliot picked, cause that's how much i disliked that pick....
Henry aint Zeke. They went defense in the 2nd. So thats still 2 holes filled, just one of them aint right away.
The difference between those two is that Elliott is a better blocker, a better pass catcher, and he makes defenders miss. Henry would be good once he gets in the open field. He just has to get in the open field. Put it this way, I have confidence that Elliott can succeed in 8 to 9 man fronts in the NFL. I have my doubts Henry can succeed in that same situation. But I do get what you're saying.never said he was elliot and i'm not saying whose better, but he wouldve worked...and that wouldve filled 2 holes right away, not just 1....
PreachThe difference between those two is that Elliott is a better blocker, a better pass catcher, and he makes defenders miss. Henry would be good once he gets in the open field. He just has to get in the open field. Put it this way, I have confidence that Elliott can succeed in 8 to 9 man fronts in the NFL. I have my doubts Henry can succeed in that same situation. But I do get what you're saying.
People comparing Elliott to other backs in this draft need to stop. I think the bigger debate is Elliott vs Lamar Miller.The difference between those two is that Elliott is a better blocker, a better pass catcher, and he makes defenders miss. Henry would be good once he gets in the open field. He just has to get in the open field. Put it this way, I have confidence that Elliott can succeed in 8 to 9 man fronts in the NFL. I have my doubts Henry can succeed in that same situation. But I do get what you're saying.
I get what your saying and thats a fair question, say you take Rasmey and got Miller, you could flip that question by saying get Norman in FA and take Zeke, over Rasmey and Miller. Always gonna be debate.Posted this on CZ, I'll do the same here b/c it's my main concern. Overall, I'm pleased with the draft but the debate between these two players is still bothering. I'm not confident that the Cowboys allocated their resources properly here. We could have had Lamar Miller for less money and used the 4th pick somewhere else, most likely on Ramsey. Granted, Miller is a few years older but he's a known commodity and also considered a "complete back" just like Elliott. We all agree that both players would improve our run game from last year but is the difference between Elliott and Miller worth a Jalen Ramsey and $11 million dollars? What do you guys think? I don't have a strong stance on this so I'm open to some convincing.
Elliott (21 yrs old) - 4 yrs/$25 million (fully guaranteed)
or
Miller (25 yrs old) - 4 yrs/$26 million (14M guaranteed) + Jalen Ramsey or another player at #4
I was thinking the same thing. @Primetime21 brought this up a few times. I think the decision was a result of:Posted this on CZ, I'll do the same here b/c it's my main concern. Overall, I'm pleased with the draft but the debate between these two players is still bothering. I'm not confident that the Cowboys allocated their resources properly here. We could have had Lamar Miller for less money and used the 4th pick somewhere else, most likely on Ramsey. Granted, Miller is a few years older but he's a known commodity and also considered a "complete back" just like Elliott. We all agree that both players would improve our run game from last year but is the difference between Elliott and Miller worth a Jalen Ramsey and $11 million dollars? What do you guys think? I don't have a strong stance on this so I'm open to some convincing.
Elliott (21 yrs old) - 4 yrs/$25 million (fully guaranteed)
or
Miller (25 yrs old) - 4 yrs/$26 million (14M guaranteed) + Jalen Ramsey or another player at #4