ÃÛÌÒTV

(Editor's Note: Time to check the mail! The DallasCowboys.com staff writers answer your questions here in 'Mailbag' presented by Miller Lite.)

I remember in years past the Cowboys employed older, veteran backup quarterbacks like Brad Johnson, Jon Kitna and Andy Dalton. Was that a front office preference or coach's decision? If it was the front office, what changed? Would you prefer they had more experience at backup QB? – Garet Tanaka/Wailuku, HI

Nick: Well, you just named three quarterbacks over the last 17 years and most of them were here briefly. I don't think the Cowboys have really had a philosophy on the type of backup quarterback. There are times we've seen backups that are drastically different than the starter, meaning it will be a new game plan if he has to play. Sometimes that's actually a good thing because teams don't know what to expect and can't really use the previous game tape to prepare.

On the flip side, a new style also means changes on your side of the ball as well. And to your question, we've seen younger quarterbacks who haven't started games be the backup, and then we've seen veterans who actually had more experience than the starter. It just comes down to the right fit. Veteran backups cost money, too. You're already paying the starter $60 million per season as we all know.

So what they've done this year is grabbed not one but two relatively younger and cheaper backups with the hope one of them will stick. Who knows, maybe they keep both Milton and Howell, considering it would only cost about $3 million total, although it would count as another valuable roster spot.

Tommy: I'm not really sure whose decision it was to lean one way versus another, but ever since Brian Schottenheimer took over as the head coach, Dallas has made the moves to go younger at the quarterback position, so that may tip the hand at the preference. I think it just kind of depends on what you're looking for. Do you want a quarterback that can distribute but may not be able to "win you the game," or do you take a chance on a player with great traits and a good situation to grow and develop in? There's no wrong answer, I think it just boils down to what each staff wants. There are very few scenarios where your starter going down and needing to play a backup ends well, so I don't necessarily see the downside of giving a young player reps and seeing if he can put it all together.