So i know this is a baseball board and this is completely unrelated besides it being local sports... but is anybody else as infuriated as I am that the Boys had a chance to take Blaine Gabbert and didnt? I seriously could just put my fist through something right now!!!!!

10 more years of "the anointed one"

i'm sorry, but romo is just not a winner. one playoff win in how many seasons? he just cant win the big game period. He's the Shane Falco fo real football. Chokes when the game is on the line. And i dont care what they say you cannot entirely blame the Oline. for a good 3-4 years the boys had one of the best olines in football.

I just dont understand how you can pass up on the number 1 rated QB in the draft when he falls to you. Blaine Gabbert is not Brady Quinn for chrissakes. He's in the mold of Steve Young with an even bigger arm. The dude is a beast.

I'm getting really tired of the perpetual dissapointment of metroplex sports. The rangers have always been my true love and we finally got some payoff last year and it was fantastic. However its also a reminder of just how mismanaged the rest of the metroplex sports teams are. Half the blame goes on Hicks. But Jerry Jones is the second coming of Al Davis, and despite anything the Mavs do they just cant handle playoff atmosphere basketball. Its beyond irritating.

The cowboys couldve had their QB of the future right then in now, ribbon wrapped and handed to them. You can get a decent OL in ANY round. Sit the kid for a year or two ala Aaron Rodgers and if they truly belive that Romo is still a decent player and in his prime by then, he'd have great trade value. I just dont see how you pass up the highest rated QB for an average OL. And i'm sorry if he doesnt become anything but elite... by passing up a potential perennial QB... he's just going to be average.

I thought long and hard trying to come up with a clever reply, DcAggie, but nothing beats the plain truth: you are retarded.

Good Lord--Blaine Gabbert?? You're joking I hope. Only an aggie would post that.

I'm curious why Gabbert is only a "potential perennial QB." It's not like he's going to change positions.

Mel Kiper, Todd McShay and several other journalists would disagree that taking Blaine Gabbert is considered "retarded". in fact Gabbert was rated as high as number 1 pick overall at several points. its not like i'm arguing about taking Jake Locker or Ryan Mallet. The simple fact is Gabbert has been compared by many experts to be the second coming of Steve Young, but with a stronger and in fact more accurate arm. Not to mention his high wonderlick scores and memory test. He has all the intangibles, and could you imagine him with our receiving corp? it'd be absolutely ridiculous. Sometimes you need to take the best potential player overall than what is considered necessarily a need. Sometimes you need to take a chance. The Cowboys have perpetually faiiled to make any gambles while drafting, and the majority of their first round picks (sans Ware) have not turned out well. That's how football go.

@aquaman

maybe i misused the word perrenial. my point is he has a chance to be ELITE.

and i'm sorry, maybe youre not a cowboys fan. I dunno. but i think its a complete waste of time and energy, and faith, if youre waiting for romo to bring you a ring. cuz its simply just not going to happen.

Do you not understand the concept of team needs? The Cowboys obviously didn't have the number 1 pick, so anything that says Gabbert could have gone #1 is irrelevant to them. Carolina needed a franchise QB, so they were mocked that way.

This is a ridiculous conversation. I challenge you to find a single expert anywhere that suggested the Cowboys should take a QB with their first round pick. A single one. Any one will do. If you prefer, you can create a fake persona, make a website, and then say it yourself. Whatever floats your boat.

This team is a few pieces away (or so it believes) from being competitive. We already have a franchise QB. Tonight we got a guy most of the experts you cite called the best OL prospect in the draft. You can't just get that in any round, and those kinds of guys don't grow on trees.

So yes, it is retarded to suggest that the Cowboys take a player #9 overall that has zero chance to see the field this year and zero chance to provide any value to the team in the short-term. And it is retarded to suggest that the Cowboys take a QB that high, pay him what they would have to pay him, and then keep him next to a player (Romo) they are already paying like a franchise QB.

The bottom line is that I don't need to imagine Gabbert with our receiving corps, because I can just wait and see Romo (an indisputably better player at this moment) with that same corps. And it will be glorious. Beautiful. Perfect. And he will be a better player for having Tyron Smith protecting his right side than he would having Gabbert holding a clipboard and wearing a visor.

I hate comps sometimes. i had just typed up a long ass response and my comp freaked out.

i'll attempt to summarize.

All i can tell you is we can just respectfully agree to disagree.

However, first off, my arguement has NEVER been whether the Cowboys have ever been determined to NEED or SHOULD ever draft a QB. i'm not a moron i know they have more needs. My sheer point is that sometimes you SHOULD grab a player that you might not determine you necessarily need at the time. Especially one that can be an ELITE QB for you in the future. I understand that Tyson has been considered one of the best in his position, but there are just as many that belive he's undersized for the NFL and misses too many assignments. Everyone has their critics.

I think the big difference btw you and I is it appears that you have way more faith in Romo than I do. I do not belive he's an elite QB despite the fact that he is our "franchise QB". You can cite number of TDs, YDs per Game, Yds per year or any other stats that most columnists use to determine a QBs "elitism" ala John Claytong. But the bottom line is he's only won ONE playoff game, and he has a penchant for losing big games. When the game is on the line he chokes. And he's WAY to turnover prone. But that's just one man's opinion.

All i'm saying is that the ultimate goal is to win a superbowl. you might be right Tyson coudl be the greatest OL to play the game, however as long as Romo is our QB, a SB will continue to elude us.

So why delay the inevitable. My point is we could have taken a chance at Gabbert and had him sit and learn for two years. Thats how you develop a franchise now. It has to be done that way. There is too much of a difference now between CFB and the NFL. Player and systems wise. The learning curve is just too steep.

One more thing to possibly help explan myself. The % differential of success among QBs decreases drastically from 1st rd to the later rds. Sure you can cite Brady or Montana, but thats rare. However the % differential of success among position players such as OL, DL, LB etc, does not decrease as drastically from the first round to the later rounds. I.E. you have a better chance of getting a player just as good as Tyson in the later rounds than you do of grabbing an elite QB.

I'm sorry, but i'm looking towards the future. I wanna see a QB w a clipboard and a visor. As an aggie (since many of you like to use that as an insult) i can tell you McGee is not the answer.

To Summice, According to you, youre happy waiting 5, 6, 7 yrs of Romo and no SB then to start the QB of the future search. I'm not willing to wait that long, and I thiink we past up a huge opportunity in Gabbert. We shouldve grabbed him at 9. and got the rest of what we "need" with our other picks. Again statistically we could get good players to fill those positions in the later rounds. We could have our cake and eat it too....

One more thing cuz i'm certain someone is going to attempt to redact my argument by saying that we could get a replacement for Romo in FA sooner than it takes to get Gabbert ready. Superbowl QBs are drafted by their teams. you rarely get a SB winning QB via FA. I belive in the last 10 yrs there's only Brees and Dilfer. Rodgers, Rothlesberger, Eli, Peyton, Brady. All drafted by their teams and besides brady, all 1st round picks.

Again, seems like we just have a difference in philosophy and opinion. We'll see what happens.

Respectfully,

DcAggie06 - I understand what you're saying, but drafting Gabbert when there are more pressing needs would not be wise for any Cowboy's coach that's interested in winning. Unless you have Michael Vick at QB, you need an adequate OL. Our RT is a slouch, and is on his way out the door. Chances are, the boys will slide Free over to RT and put the rookie at LT. He will have a learning curve, but it makes no sense drafting a QB when you already have a starter, and neglect a position where your starter is old and is on his way out.

Aquaman's first post wins the thread.

" My point is we could have taken a chance at Gabbert and had him sit and learn for two years. Thats how you develop a franchise now. It has to be done that way. There is too much of a difference now between CFB and the NFL. Player and systems wise. The learning curve is just too steep."

Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Sam Bradford, Josh Freeman, Matt Stafford...

Dc, I'd like to have your back, but... Gabbert is no sure thing 1st of all. There were at least 4 teams ahead of Dallas that really needed QBs and only 2 took QBs...That should tell you that there were enough question marks about the QBs in this draft that none are really considered sure things. Other than that, the Boys have much bigger needs on the line, in the secondary and at linebacker. Maybe next year they draft the QB of the future.

One of my good friends is a coach for the Broncos and was telling me about how fickle the draft is...certain teams lovs guys that other teams hate. He told me that from a talent eval perspective, liineman are the easiest to project and QBs by far the hardest. Brady was a 6th rounder, Jamarcus Russell was #1. People seriously debated that Ryan Leaf should go before Peyton Manning. Point is Gabbert has about a 50% chance of panning out; thats a big risk with 1st round money. The best tackle in the draft is a smarter pick. I was expecting Jerry to take another WR...

@ durr

and the combined superbowl records of the quoted QBs is?.... 0. I'll give you Matt Ryan, however BC ran a pro style system, and Matty Ice is one of the QBs that has all the mental intangibles that make up for anything else he's lacking. Very ala brady. However, Flacco has succeeded behind one of the best defenses in football. His numbers arent that great. look it up, I grabbed him up in my fantasy league almsot certain this was gonna be the year he goes off.... didnt happen. Stafford further proves my point of a QB that should be sitting prior to starting, but you gotta love the kids heart going out for that one last play with a separated shoulder to win that last game of the season. Bradford looks promising, however as with the rest, his numbers were just not that good.

The QBs that get drafted and sit for a year or two win superbowls bottom line.

i gave you a list of recent winners.

Rodgers - sat for how long behind farve
Brees - sat behind Chris Weinke for years. Chris Weinke!!! (i belive it was him. too lazy to look it up)
Rothlesberger sat behind Tommy freakin Maddox for a year
Eli - ok you got me on that one
Brady - sat behind bledsoe for almost 2 years
Peyton - got me on that one (damn Mannings)

joey,

please rename the thread "Bash DCaggie06 for wanting the Cowboys to draft a QB of the future"

I belive its more fitting and hitting the theme...

@ Adam

Thanks for trying lol. way to go Von Miller going no 2 though. Whoop!

I understand what youre saying, but when is the next chance the boys are going to have as high a pick as they did. I hope to god not very soon. Hence why i'm so adamant that this was the perfect opportunity to pick our QB of the future.

I know CFB is always a year by year you never who's gonna be the next big thing, but besides Andrew Luck (who's going 1 period end of report) i hope the boys are not in a position pick at number 1. besides that i dont belive theres many big QBs ppl are talking about. but i dunno. i'm gonna stick with my guns here. i'm pretty sure i'm right here. but when the rest of the world disagrees you gotta listen. and who knows maybe i might still get my cake and eat it too. you gotta love Andy Dalton (just dunno how his game relates to the NFL.... he reminds me of a stephen mcgee but can throw) and i know alot of ppl are really high on colin kaepernick. I'm just honestly shocked that locker and ponder went as high as they did.....

but lord forbid Jerry keeps his Arkansas connections and picks up Mallett.

if THAT happens... this becomes a completely different thread altogether.

Tony Romo is not the problem.

Well I wouldn't say Tony Romo is not the problem. He is a problem, particularly his propensity to not take care of the football, but the bigger needs are on the o-line and corner. Would could have drafted Ingram as well because our RBs are not exactly lighting the world on fire, but this is not a position of need

yeah i was really hoping for ingram to fall to us in the 2nd

Brees was drafted by the Chargers and played behind Doug Flutie for most of his rookie year. He was taken with the 1st pick of the 2nd round. I played high school ball with Drew, he's the real deal.

There's nothing that says the Cowboys have to get their QB of the future in the 1st round. There is a 1st round bust for every 1st round success. Unless you are drafting a Peyton Manning, there just is no such thing as a sure thing. I don't think Gabbert is going to be that great. I don't think he will be as good as Romo. I could be wrong, but I don't think there is a pro bowl QB in this years draft. Hell, if there is it may be Andy Dalton.

Other than Luck we don't know yet who the top QBs for next year are going to be. Did anyone think Cam Newton would go #1 at this point last year? No way.

I hear what youre saying, I just think 1st round QB is such a risky proposition that I would almost always want to draft another position that high. The transition for college to NFL Qb is so drastic that you really can't project that position very well.

@ aquaman

Here is the fake persona/fake websites I was able to create mentioning the boys QB situation...

http://newsok.com/the-future-is-now/article/3562667 - this does basically say to NOT take Gabbert and to wait for Kaepernik or Dalton....

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dallas-cowboys/headlines/20110427-rick-gosselin-i-wouldn_t-trade-up-for-either-cam-newton-or-blaine-gabbert.ece

Take this one however you want, but Gosselin says not to TRADE UP for Gabbert. He never states to not take him if he were to fall to the boys at pick 9.

I may not be right, but at least the proves to you i'm not slow in the head..... cuz if i was i wouldntve been able to create these fakey websites in a days time.

Blaine Gabbert? That's absurd. I was hoping the Cowboys would trade down first. Second I was hoping for Prince Amakumara. Now the Giants have Prince and I only hope that he turns out to be a bust. Just my take on the draft.

Brees didn't sit behind Weinke. Roethlisberger didn't sit behind Maddox for a year, Roethlisberger started his first year. Brady didn't sit behind Drew Bledsoe for nearly two years, Bledso was injured in Brady's rookie season and Brady took them to a Superbowl win as a rookie. so in your list of six quarterbacks, only one sat for a significant amount of time to start.

@adam

durrr might disagree with you about the transition from CFB to NFL... he pretty much reemed me for stating the same. he's obviously been through that process. I believe he used to coach golf and QB at West Texas A&M too....

good call on flutie, weinke was Carolina i dunno what i was thinking. Love me some Flutie Flakes. Didnt remember Brees going 2nd round though. thanks for schooling me on that one homie. Its impossible to not like Brees though. He's like the little engine that could. Nobody really ever gave him a chance. I was so mad when San Diego got rid of him the year immediately after he got them to their first playoffs since the year they went to the super bowl. Rivers is good... but who got the last laugh!

Again, i hear what youre saying, and i agree with each and every one of you. I get that picking a OL or DE or LB etc, in the 1st round is the safer choice. I get that taking a QB in the first round is riskier. But i'm a risk vs reward type guy. But everyone seems to be missing the point that we could AFFORD to take that risk this year, and still get an equally decent OL in the next rounds, there are several still available.

Look, we're doing this forum @ bbtia so we gotta bring some baseball into it. Sometimes you gotta make a risky decision for a chance at a HR. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt. We did it last year with Harden, it didnt work. We did it this year with Webb, we dont know how that's going to pan out yet. For every Hamilton trade JD made, there was a Danks, Volquez disaster. We all get that. But the fact is the rangers are making thos decisions and taking those risks.

But seriosuly... when is the last time the cowboys have even swung for the fences?

@ marktown

i corrected myself with brees. Brady sat his rookie year and and i was counting the year bledsoe got injured as his second year. I should have clarified.

Your are correct about big ben though, altought he was behind both Maddox and Charlie batch i forgot they both got injured and he ended up laying the majority of the season. 13-0 in fact.

However with him being mentioned (as a cowboys fan i naturally hate him for merely being a steeler)

Roethlisberger - picked 11th, 6'5 240lbs, scored a 25 on the wonderlick, considered above average arm strength and mobile. One of the more accurate QBs at the combine that year.

Gabbert - picked 10th, 6'5, 240lb, scored high on the wonderlick (couldnt find the exact score), ran a 4.62 40, and was considered the most accurate QB at the combine.

I'm not saying Gabbert will be the next Roethlisberger, but look at the similarities. and consider the potential.