The Final Word

[Brian]

Maybe we can settle this once and for all. As any of you who have read my posts know, I am opposed to the signing of Emmitt Smith. On other threads I am reading "Emmitt can bring leadership, a winning attitude, be a mentor, etc." or "Emmitt can put fannies in the seats" or "Emmitt and Marcel can split time"

etc. etc. etc.

Now, I am not the be all and end all (close though) but I have just been soaking it all in and tried to form some objective opinions.

First, the facts:

1) Emmitt wants to start. His reason for not retiring is he wants to reach 20,000 yds within the next 3 years or so. He has made no secret of this and this is not news to most of you.
Most teams do not play games with two backs splitting time evenly. Most have a "feature" back and some "relievers" if you will. Most running backs will tell you they need 20-25 carries to get into a "groove." Most backs are not happy or productive with 10-15 carries a game. So, if Emmitt signs, he and Marcel aren't going to "split time" or be an effective 1-2 punch. One or the other is going to have to sit alot more than the other.

Period.

Emmitt certainly isn't going to "split time". Common sense tells it would take many more years to reach 20,000 if he did and father time is catching up with him. He knows it, the coaches do, and so do you all. Can Emmitt still star right now? I think so. He nearly gained 1,000 yards last year behind a very inferior line (compared to Az's) and now add Hodgins into the mix. But do you still think the fire is going to be there when he achieves his goal? I don't. He's retired and everyone knows it.

So that means Marcel sits. The Cards just re-signed him and he is their future at running back. His contract will expire by the time Emmitt reaches 20,000 and that means he will have wasted those years. It will hurt his development and growth, not to mention future contracts. So I don't think he'd be inclined to re-sign with the Cards again. He has very quietly worked his tail off to unseat Thomas Jones and he deserves to be the starter . I don't think he'd be very happy about going back to being a backup, role-player, change-of-pace back, whatever.

Think about what we may be sacrificing long term just to put "fannies in the seats" for a little while as a publicity stunt. We all know the majority of these "fans" are as fickle as the day is long and if the Cards come out of the gate struggling then the "Emmitt Smith Experience" will lose it's novelty as fast as you can say "The Cowboys Suck!"

There is great young depth at RB and I am excited about what I saw in Anderson. So the argument of "What if Marcel gets injured" just doesn't wash with me. Running back is never mentioned as a "hole" or "need" by anyone on this board.

So let's hope we put the Emmitt money back in our wallet, wish him well in New England, and focus our time, attention and most importantly our money, on what we need to be. D-line, reciever and center.

What do you all say we put that dog to bed.

 

[Shane]

Damn great minds think alike

 

[stretchthefield]

Just say no to Emmitt Smith

I'm with you on this harleyrider.

Shipp, Anderson, Scobey & Prentice give us good quality & depth at RB, Why throw money away on an old timer at a position of no need?

Bring in free agents at a position of need ! As you listed above D-line primarily.

Though I think WR & C could be addressed in the draft.

 

[Brian]

Shane,

Yours is great, mine is so-so

"I know Tango, and you sir are no Tango"

 

[PJ1]

Well said. All points valid and please don't sign Emmitt. Not the direction we should be heading in at all.

 

[Shane]

Harley you have a PM

 

[conraddobler]

Well said and just once I'd like the Cardinals to be the one's saying something like.....

Well we thought it over and we decided we don't want to play on the west coast.....

Errr emm we mean we only want ex Dallas players who are in their prime and emmm still good.

 

[Shane]

Harley

Read my response in the the thread "In The Minority" posted by Chris Sanders i think you will like it!

 

[Brian]

Shane,

I guess great and so-so minds do think alike! (I kinda wish now I hadn't wasted AN HOUR of my time to type that, you already said it)

But I did include all the vowels!

 

[jmt]

You guys are nuts. i love Shipp but he has not had even one complete good season. Smith could be tremendous behind our line and if he can recruit a few thousand more fans in Phoenix to come out and the Cards actually start winning we will have expaned the fan base. We might even get a Monday night home game or at least some national exposure. Shipp is our man - he signed for what - five years, but Emmitt would be great here for a couple of seasons. I would love to see the Cards in the limelight for a change and don't you think his coming here would send a message?

 

[football24/7]

Good post!! I also think we should look to other more pressing needs. Smith is purely a PR move to capitalize on all the cowturd fans.

 

[Brian]

jmt,

The only thing I can say is I don't think you read the post thoroughly enough (and I mean no offense by that). I've already disputed every point you made.

P.S. I think it was 4 yrs not 5. So like I said Marcel will be wasting away for 3 of those. The running back by commitee works so infrequently that folks wouldn't be able to spit out the three teams that do it like they were drawing a gun.

 

[john h]

Re: Just say no to Emmitt Smith

Originally posted by stretchthefield
I'm with you on this harleyrider.

Shipp, Anderson, Scobey & Prentice give us good quality & depth at RB, Why throw money away on an old timer at a position of no need?

Bring in free agents at a position of need ! As you listed above D-line primarily.

Though I think WR & C could be addressed in the draft.

Everyone seems to be forgetting Thomas Jones. He is not gone yet and may not be gone. He is one of those race horses that come out of the gate at 50-1 at this point and I would sure put a sawbuck on his nose. The primary reason Bidwill would sign Smith is attendance -- I think.

 

[RedStorm]

Re: Re: Just say no to Emmitt Smith

Originally posted by john h
Everyone seems to be forgetting Thomas Jones. He is not gone yet and may not be gone. He is one of those race horses that come out of the gate at 50-1 at this point and I would sure put a sawbuck on his nose. The primary reason Bidwill would sign Smith is attendance -- I think.

I think TJ is gone considering his attitude with him breaking his hand in a bar fight and then denying it and trying to cover it up. If there are no takes I bet they cut him by June 1.

 

[Brian]

I would sure put a sawbuck on his nose

uuh..................okay. I guess. It is a free country and all but TJ's a big guy and prone to fighting, you may just want to let that lie.

 

[RonF]

It doesn't really matter who carries the ball, if the O-line doesn't stay healthy and play together, otherwise we are not going anywhere. However, I don't see how having Emmitt would be a detriment, we need all the help we can get.

 

[Goldfield]

Originally posted by HarleyRider
Maybe we can settle this once and for all. As any of you who have read my posts know, I am opposed to the signing of Emmitt Smith. On other threads I am reading "Emmitt can bring leadership, a winning attitude, be a mentor, etc." or "Emmitt can put fannies in the seats" or "Emmitt and Marcel can split time"

etc. etc. etc.

Now, I am not the be all and end all (close though) but I have just been soaking it all in and tried to form some objective opinions.

First, the facts:

1) Emmitt wants to start. His reason for not retiring is he wants to reach 20,000 yds within the next 3 years or so. He has made no secret of this and this is not news to most of you.
Most teams do not play games with two backs splitting time evenly. Most have a "feature" back and some "relievers" if you will. Most running backs will tell you they need 20-25 carries to get into a "groove." Most backs are not happy or productive with 10-15 carries a game. So, if Emmitt signs, he and Marcel aren't going to "split time" or be an effective 1-2 punch. One or the other is going to have to sit alot more than the other.

Period.

Emmitt certainly isn't going to "split time". Common sense tells it would take many more years to reach 20,000 if he did and father time is catching up with him. He knows it, the coaches do, and so do you all. Can Emmitt still star right now? I think so. He nearly gained 1,000 yards last year behind a very inferior line (compared to Az's) and now add Hodgins into the mix. But do you still think the fire is going to be there when he achieves his goal? I don't. He's retired and everyone knows it.

So that means Marcel sits. The Cards just re-signed him and he is their future at running back. His contract will expire by the time Emmitt reaches 20,000 and that means he will have wasted those years. It will hurt his development and growth, not to mention future contracts. So I don't think he'd be inclined to re-sign with the Cards again. He has very quietly worked his tail off to unseat Thomas Jones and he deserves to be the starter . I don't think he'd be very happy about going back to being a backup, role-player, change-of-pace back, whatever.

Think about what we may be sacrificing long term just to put "fannies in the seats" for a little while as a publicity stunt. We all know the majority of these "fans" are as fickle as the day is long and if the Cards come out of the gate struggling then the "Emmitt Smith Experience" will lose it's novelty as fast as you can say "The Cowboys Suck!"

There is great young depth at RB and I am excited about what I saw in Anderson. So the argument of "What if Marcel gets injured" just doesn't wash with me. Running back is never mentioned as a "hole" or "need" by anyone on this board.

So let's hope we put the Emmitt money back in our wallet, wish him well in New England, and focus our time, attention and most importantly our money, on what we need to be. D-line, reciever and center.

What do you all say we put that dog to bed.

+

Man thats is a great post, I would much rather sign a WR or Center instead. that would help this team alot more...

 

[john h]

Originally posted by RonF
It doesn't really matter who carries the ball, if the O-line doesn't stay healthy and play together, otherwise we are not going anywhere. However, I don't see how having Emmitt would be a detriment, we need all the help we can get.

Every once in a while we see teams give up on former good runners thinking they are done for only to see these guys come back with a few more good years. O.J. Anderson would probably be a good example. I cannot remember but I think Emmitt is either 34 or 36 and in good health so with any kind of blocking I think he can be an effective runner. He still has some great moves and is a different type of runner than Shipp. I think they would compliment each other. I would not expect him to play for a million dollars but we could probably not afford to pay him $4 mil either. I read he met with Bidwill which sounds unusal to me and Bill is always thinking money and if he sees Emmitt as a guy who will bring in fans I would not be surprised I really do think a guy like him can add chemistry to a team and can add somehting beyond yardage. If the price is right you really cannot have to many running backs. This is the position with the shortest life in the NFL. If Shipp goes down we are in a world of hurt. Smith or not we do need another RB.

 

[john h]

Originally posted by HarleyRider
Maybe we can settle this once and for all. As any of you who have read my posts know, I am opposed to the signing of Emmitt Smith. On other threads I am reading "Emmitt can bring leadership, a winning attitude, be a mentor, etc." or "Emmitt can put fannies in the seats" or "Emmitt and Marcel can split time"

etc. etc. etc.

Now, I am not the be all and end all (close though) but I have just been soaking it all in and tried to form some objective opinions.

First, the facts:

1) Emmitt wants to start. His reason for not retiring is he wants to reach 20,000 yds within the next 3 years or so. He has made no secret of this and this is not news to most of you.
Most teams do not play games with two backs splitting time evenly. Most have a "feature" back and some "relievers" if you will. Most running backs will tell you they need 20-25 carries to get into a "groove." Most backs are not happy or productive with 10-15 carries a game. So, if Emmitt signs, he and Marcel aren't going to "split time" or be an effective 1-2 punch. One or the other is going to have to sit alot more than the other.

Period.

Emmitt certainly isn't going to "split time". Common sense tells it would take many more years to reach 20,000 if he did and father time is catching up with him. He knows it, the coaches do, and so do you all. Can Emmitt still star right now? I think so. He nearly gained 1,000 yards last year behind a very inferior line (compared to Az's) and now add Hodgins into the mix. But do you still think the fire is going to be there when he achieves his goal? I don't. He's retired and everyone knows it.

So that means Marcel sits. The Cards just re-signed him and he is their future at running back. His contract will expire by the time Emmitt reaches 20,000 and that means he will have wasted those years. It will hurt his development and growth, not to mention future contracts. So I don't think he'd be inclined to re-sign with the Cards again. He has very quietly worked his tail off to unseat Thomas Jones and he deserves to be the starter . I don't think he'd be very happy about going back to being a backup, role-player, change-of-pace back, whatever.

Think about what we may be sacrificing long term just to put "fannies in the seats" for a little while as a publicity stunt. We all know the majority of these "fans" are as fickle as the day is long and if the Cards come out of the gate struggling then the "Emmitt Smith Experience" will lose it's novelty as fast as you can say "The Cowboys Suck!"

There is great young depth at RB and I am excited about what I saw in Anderson. So the argument of "What if Marcel gets injured" just doesn't wash with me. Running back is never mentioned as a "hole" or "need" by anyone on this board.

So let's hope we put the Emmitt money back in our wallet, wish him well in New England, and focus our time, attention and most importantly our money, on what we need to be. D-line, reciever and center.

What do you all say we put that dog to bed.

You can use all the logic in the world about Smith but if Mr. B and Michael want him then there is no discussion. When I read he personally met with Mr. B it got my attention.

 

[Brian]

This is the position with the shortest life in the NFL. If Shipp goes down we are in a world of hurt. Smith or not we do need another RB.

No, we do not need another running back. No one, has ever said on this board "we need more backs, there is no depth behind Shipp."

What if Blake goes down? What if Leonard Davis goes down? No team has ever had Dan Marino as the starter with Joe Montana as the backup and John Elway pulling third string. Injuries happen and teams draft for depth behind the starters knowing the backup isn't as good as the starter. That's why they have the differentiation between "starter" and "backup"

If we sign Emmitt, Marcel rots on the bench, and that will kill the future of that position (if you can see beyond the next 3 years). I don't recall the Cowboys addressing running back year after year in the draft and free agency. Of course not, they had Emmitt.

We have Marcel.

You can't tell me that at his age, Emmitt is that much better than Marcel OR HIS UPSIDE IS BETTER.

Emmitt is a publicity stunt and not a need.

Defensive line is a need.

NO ONE can argue that.

 

[john h]

Originally posted by HarleyRider
This is the position with the shortest life in the NFL. If Shipp goes down we are in a world of hurt. Smith or not we do need another RB.

No, we do not need another running back. No one, has ever said on this board "we need more backs, there is no depth behind Shipp."

What if Blake goes down? What if Leonard Davis goes down? No team has ever had Dan Marino as the starter with Joe Montana as the backup and John Elway pulling third string. Injuries happen and teams draft for depth behind the starters knowing the backup isn't as good as the starter. That's why they have the differentiation between "starter" and "backup"

If we sign Emmitt, Marcel rots on the bench, and that will kill the future of that position (if you can see beyond the next 3 years). I don't recall the Cowboys addressing running back year after year in the draft and free agency. Of course not, they had Emmitt.

We have Marcel.

You need to take a look at the number of QBs that went down this past season and fortunately the team had decent backups to come in and replace them. Over and over I hear coahes talk about team depth. It is not just a requirement in pro footbal but baseball and other sports.The cards have always had a problem with quality depth. Last year we just about ran out of players at certain positions. St Louis lost their Qb, the Eagles lost their Qb, Pittsburg lost their Qb, Tampa had to use an experienced backup. No team will make it through a season in the nfl without having to call upon backups at many positions. Not only that but at almost every position you have to use your backups. Players cannot play every down of every game. those with depth win those with no depth lose.

You can't tell me that at his age, Emmitt is that much better than Marcel OR HIS UPSIDE IS BETTER.

Emmitt is a publicity stunt and not a need.

Defensive line is a need.

NO ONE can argue that.

 

[Brian]

uh, John.

What happened there?

You kinda mixed our two posts there.

But I get what you're saying.

And yes, alot of QB's went down last year but not many of the backups that replaced them were signed to multi-million dollar contracts.

That's all I'm saying. I think the team needs to focus it's remaining money on the D-line since that is it's biggest need, and despite what some are hoping and praying for, Suggs will be long gone by the 6th pick.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Anderson, Scobey, and Travis Prentice will NOT cut it as backup runningbacks.

We need a legitimate backup runner, but I'm not sure if Smith would help that much.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

What irks me about possibly signing emmitt smith is the fact that if everyone is concerned about getting a solid rb to helkp shoulder the load of Shipp, then why may I ask didnt Graves go after Stephen Davis?

Did you see what Carolina is signing him for ? 2.5 mill signing bonus, and $500,000 roster bonus? Thats cheap! for a guy with his talent. Not to mention that a lot of the contract, although quite large-somewhere in the $36 million range-is incentive based.

I think this was a major bungle to not even inquire about this guy! I like Shipp but the chance of having a Stephen Davis int he backfield immediatly upgrades this offense drastically.

The cards will end up paying Emmitt much more guarnateed money over the length of the contract than the Panthers pay Davis-guarantee it!

 

[Brian]

Anderson, Scobey, and Travis Prentice will NOT cut it as backup runningbacks.

Krang,

First and foremost I am not defending the Cards draft history, but some people in the organization who have devoted their entire LIVES to football and sniffing out talent feel they will. I kinda think these people know more about the game and who will fit into the system they are trying to implement than any of us ever will, so I got to go with what they see in them. They don't just cut them checks because the cheerleaders pay is already maxed out.

As I said before, the point of discussing whether or not Smith will suffice as backup is moot. He isn't coming here and they aren't offering him 9 mil over 3 yrs to back up anyone. He is coming here to start and IMHO it's a waste of money.

The difference between what he can bring to the table vs. what Marcel can isn't worth 9 mil. Especially considering the D-line can't sack an old woman in a wheelchair.