April 22, 20242 yr Author 31 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: Guyton might not be there at 53. Believe an eventual capable T is even that high on the overall leagues board. Eagles could take him at 22 though. Here we go with the "He won't be there" There is no way to know until the actual draft unfolds. If we knew how the draft unfolds why have it> Just assign the players to teams by their ranking LOL
April 22, 20242 yr Just now, GreenbleedinNC said: Here we go with the "He won't be there" There is no way to know until the actual draft unfolds. If we knew how the draft unfolds why have it> Just assign the players to teams by their ranking LOL So you believe Guyton will be available at 53?
April 22, 20242 yr Author 33 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: Guyton might not be there at 53. Believe an eventual capable T is even that high on the overall leagues board. Eagles could take him at 22 though. DeJean might not be there at 53 either, Wiggins may not be. Any OT you like may not be,that's why we play the draft games
April 22, 20242 yr 6 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: Eye test Cowboys were way better. Record wise it was close. We just kept finding ways to win to start 10-1. Eye test vs the better teams ...the Eagles were better. Eye test vs the easy teams.... Dallas did their typical running up the score. Take the best 4 games... head to head split ( they won with the extra rest after we came off 3 physical games) SF....both sucked Buffalo...we won they sucked KC for us...we won. Detroit for them, refs won. You want to gage teams...I look at how they look vs the better teams. And the degree of difficulty of the schedule. Dallas absolutely did not look better than the Eagles last year. Other than vs the really bad teams... that's easy Eye test and just reality. But I can see how you are enamored with their organization. I mean.. signing Pollard at 10.7 mil was a good business move on your part... for me, I'm signing a similar if not better RB with way less cap hit and then using the difference to bring in other players to help. Their run D was awful all season.
April 22, 20242 yr Author 5 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: So you believe Guyton will be available at 53? Doesn't matter what I believe,nor what you believe. This is why you make mocks because you have to weigh the players available to what your team needs and make decisions to let guys go or make the moves up or down Any of the top 25 could "not be there". But maybe they could be LOL. We get surprises every dang draft,you should know this by now instead of making it an annual arguing event
April 22, 20242 yr Author 36 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: Guyton might not be there at 53. Believe an eventual capable T is even that high on the overall leagues board. Eagles could take him at 22 though. Maybe we like an OT who can start at G first????
April 22, 20242 yr 14 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: Eye test Cowboys were way better. Record wise it was close. We just kept finding ways to win to start 10-1. Finding ways to win 3 straight vs Dallas, KC and Buffalo... show me the Dallas stretch of quality opponents?
April 22, 20242 yr Author 15 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: Eye test Cowboys were way better. Record wise it was close. We just kept finding ways to win to start 10-1. Their defense was better ,maybe not better,but we had an awful scheme of laying off 10 yards on 3rd downs
April 22, 20242 yr 13 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: KC wasn’t nearly as good midseason as where they finally developed into. They were physical... that takes a toll on the way the season goes. LA was a joke last year... like a week off
April 22, 20242 yr Author 4 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: So you believe Guyton will be available at 53? Will DeJean? Bowers?
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said: Their defense was better ,maybe not better,but we had an awful scheme of laying off 10 yards on 3rd downs Their defense was owned by Arizona, US game 1, Buffalo, SF and Green Bay. The Dallas defense was for show...not for dough. They were not better than the Eagles last year.
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, joemas6 said: They were physical... that takes a toll on the way the season goes. LA was a joke last year... like a week off Chargers made a weak decision on whom they brought in as OC. That was a very huge decision for that franchise…having a D minded HC.
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, joemas6 said: Their defense was owned by Arizona, US game 1, Buffalo, SF and Green Bay. The Dallas defense was for show...not for dough. They were not better than the Eagles last year. Not like our D was so stingy versus the Cards. Don’t think we allowed them to get a first down the whole game.
April 22, 20242 yr Author 2 minutes ago, joemas6 said: Their defense was owned by Arizona, US game 1, Buffalo, SF and Green Bay. The Dallas defense was for show...not for dough. They were not better than the Eagles last year. Laying off 10 yards will make any defense look awful
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said: Chargers made a weak decision on whom they brought in as OC. That was a very huge decision for that franchise…having a D minded HC. I don't care about the Chargers... Other than knowing that Dallas had an easy non physical game ...which helps over the course of 17 games. A physical battle vs KC definitely has a negative effect on 17 weeks of ball.
April 22, 20242 yr 6 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said: Their defense was better ,maybe not better,but we had an awful scheme of laying off 10 yards on 3rd downs Better D and better O
April 22, 20242 yr We had better ST than the cowboys however. Elliott is a stud. Made the decision to get a real P.
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said: Not like our D was so stingy versus the Cards. Don’t think we allowed them to get a first down the whole game. Correct... again... to me it's the same... Dallas was not better. That's you with an agenda....and when you said Pollard at 10.7 mil was a good all in move...that's when your agenda is obvious. Thar was an absolute brutal business decision that hurt them last year and going forward losing that cap space.
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said: Better D and better O Yeah...looked really good vs Buffalo
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said: We had better ST than the cowboys however. Elliott is a stud. Made the decision to get a real P. Dallas had the all pro kicker!!! Did you even watch last year?
April 22, 20242 yr 2 minutes ago, joemas6 said: I don't care about the Chargers... Other than knowing that Dallas had an easy non physical game ...which helps over the course of 17 games. A physical battle vs KC definitely has a negative effect on 17 weeks of ball. Every game was close and pushed out players to the limits physically. Patricia took over and limited the rotation even more. Our team looked whooped and worn out down the stretch completely.
April 22, 20242 yr Author 4 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said: Better D and better O I thought we set franchise records on O??? That's what someone keeps telling me. If that is the case, you lose games it's because of your defense. So IDK what you define as "better".You have different schedules. I suppose you would know if you compared common opponents and had the identical players playing
April 22, 20242 yr 4 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said: Laying off 10 yards will make any defense look awful You can tell someone on here doesn't read other posts. Tough for us to have a conversation with that.
April 22, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, joemas6 said: Correct... again... to me it's the same... Dallas was not better. That's you with an agenda....and when you said Pollard at 10.7 mil was a good all in move...that's when your agenda is obvious. Thar was an absolute brutal business decision that hurt them last year and going forward losing that cap space. I didn’t say 10.7 Pollard move was good. That’s you and your agenda. I said not signing him to top dollar long term contract was wise. Actually a pretty large divide in the two points.
Create an account or sign in to comment