If you had a cornerback and a defensive end rated equally on the board at 10, which are you taking? With the decline of our defense lately, would you say the problem was more in coverage or pass rush? – JUSTIN MAYS / CHESAPEAKE, VA
Nick: I've often heard the pass rush/coverage debate being reference to the Chicken & Egg theory and what came first? But I don't think this falls into that category. I always tend to side on pass rush being the most important. I think back to when I was a kid and playing in the yard with my dad and brothers. They were older and faster than me, but if you gave me enough time, I'm eventually going to get open and get the ball. That's my point, even the best cornerbacks in the world can't cover all day long. You've got to get to the quarterback and if there is a dynamic pass rusher sitting there at No. 10, the Cowboys would take him. Truth be told, if he was that dynamic, he'd be picked before 10. I think the Cowboys feel the same way. But in this draft, it doesn't appear as if there is an edge rusher that will be a difference-maker that you can justify taking at 10.
Rob: Thank you for listening to Talkin' Cowboys this week, Justin. (In the unlikely event you haven't yet, we had a heated debate about this very topic, so check it out.) I tend to side with pass rush because over the years I've watched Super Bowl champions like the '07 Giants and the '20 Bucs beat seemingly unbeatable quarterbacks with just a four-man rush. That being said, teams also need at least three (preferably four) cornerbacks who can really cover because that's what this pass-happy era requires. Great corners make great money for a reason. So I'd have no problem with the Cowboys going cornerback at 10 because it still seems like a position of need, even after re-signing Jourdan Lewis.
Just for fun while waiting for the draft: Do you think there's a scenario where the Cowboys trade their second-round pick to move back into the late first round to get someone? – CHRIS KEATING / MASON, TX
Nick: I do think this is a possibility, but mainly if the Cowboys trade down in the first round with the 10th pick. That's really the only scenario I see where this happens. If they traded down from 10, let's say a handful of spots to 15 and picked up a second or third in the process. That's the pick, along with your original second-round pick, you use to get yourself back into the first round. If they don't add another pick along the way, then I'm not really seeing a scenario that gets them into the first round again – UNLESS – the Cowboys are willing to part with a player. But I don't really see that happening either.
Rob: It would require more than a second-round pick. Probably a third, too? That would mean waiting like 70 picks before you're on the clock again. To answer your question, I have no idea. It all depends on who's still there and whether the Cowboys would think it's worth it. I guess you'd have the benefit of the fifth-year option for first-round picks as opposed to second-round picks, but I also can't recall a year that they've done this. They did move up three spots in the late first round to draft Mike Jenkins back in 2008.
