Editor's note: These questions were submitted before the Washington Redskins signed cornerback Josh Norman on Friday.

The weekly mailbag is an international version this week as I make a quick trip to the UK for a soccer weekend, but if you don't mind a slight delay, then let's make our final preparations for the draft together. This is the week!

Now, using only the most thought-provoking of your responses this week, here we go!

Q: How many rounds could the Cowboys be forgiven for going without drafting an offensive player? Seems like defense is the home of the biggest needs.

It is, but we better remember what we have discussed since about October. And that is the idea that the Cowboys could use help at every offensive skill position - QB, RB, WR, and TE. So, I am with you that defense, defense, and more defense makes sense because this franchise has very few special players on that side of the ball, but it is not like they are so loaded at those offensive positions that they can rule them out - besides offensive line where I think they should consider ignoring those players (remember, we still haven't seen last year's 3rd rounder Chaz Green).

Q: Obviously, it costs a king's ransom to move up to the top of the draft. With the Cowboys probably not drafting at No. 4 anytime soon, do you think they can get a quarterback to develop behind Romo in the third or fourth rounds?

I am not optimistic about that. Numbers confirm it is pretty impossible to find a real stud in that spot in the draft (about 1 in 25 odds). But, let's not rule it out that they climb back into the 1st round from #34 to get a QB. I think that might be in play at a certain point, depending on how the picks go before that.

Q: All I'm hearing now is the Cowboys have to take Bosa at No. 4. Tell me why they don't.

This one is interesting. You want me to make a case against the player I am making a case that they take. This feels like some sort of Jedi mind trick. OK. Well, I think Bosa is the right guy for this spot because he fits a need and is a Top 5 player in this draft. Those two things plus he is awesomely talented and is only 20. But, the case against would have to be that there will be at least one player available that I will have ranked higher. Either Laremy Tunsil or Jalen Ramsey (or both) will be there and I think pound-for-pound I will have them both ranked as better talents on draft day.

So, if you always take the highest ranked talent on your board, then Bosa would not be the Cowboys pick, but that means you are taking a player that you need less in Tunsil, or one that you aren't quite sure his best positional fit in Ramsey.

The other two issues are behavioral questions about Bosa (that I have looked into and have been assured are not considered big deals to investigators - although not every team has multiple defensive ends currently serving suspensions already) and the possibility of trading down being the best option (which hinges on another team's willingness to pay to move up). But, beyond that, I am pro-Bosa.

Q: How would Josh Norman fit in with the Cowboys? Is it even feasible money-wise?

Oh, it is feasible if you wanted it to be. Everything is doable in the cap world if you are determined to defer money and kick the can (which grows into the size of the rolling boulder in Raiders of the Lost Ark) until 2018 or 2019.

But, it is entirely irresponsible. And it will cost you players you don't want to lose. And Norman is 29 years old. There are reasons the smart teams don't participate in this sort of thing very often (or if they do, they sign Darrelle Revis for a 1-year deal). If you can get Norman for a 1-year deal with no money risked down the road (which you can't) then make it happen. But, I prefer to keep Travis Frederick and the rest of my young group growing and playing together.

His Xs and Os fit might make plenty of sense, but remember he is a zone corner and while the Cowboys are certainly doing some of that, there was a ton of Cover-1 this last season and I am not sure that would be his forte (not that anyone here is better, but they aren't costing $70 million). Keep stocking through the draft and don't pay guys who are almost done.

Q: Could Myles Jack be a trade-down option? How far down would you have to go to be comfortable taking him?

Well, this is complicated because I really hesitate when we are talking 2 things that are both at work here: 1) we are talking a player with pre-existing injury issues and 2) we are talking a player who plays at a high-risk injury position that will surely still go in Round 1.

So, if you combine those issues - injured and will have a high-contact collision on a frequent basis because he plays LB in the NFL - you are going to need to visit with that medical staff who has just examined his body thoroughly and give me some assurances that he is able to play 7-8 years for me most likely. If you can't, then I am not sure where I would take him. I suppose #34 would be too inviting to pass up, but in Round 1, I think I would let someone else take the chance. I need healthy bodies (this seems obvious to me, but I know many readers would take a chance on him and Jaylon Smith) in Round 1. I defer to my oft used and stolen cliche for this situation - "the most important ability is availability".

Q: Just how cuckoo would it be to take Ezekiel Elliott at No. 4? Seen it on a couple mock drafts.

Well, I have been pretty clear about this. I wouldn't take a RB at #4. Unless I was convinced he was the chosen one. And while Todd Gurley qualified last year, and it is possible that next year's class might have one, too, I am just not feeling like Ezekiel Elliott is on that Gurley/Peterson level. I think he is very, very good and quite complete. But, I just don't think he is the unstoppable force at the NFL level of those two.

With that in mind, I will defer back to the idea that in the NFL, many really great backs have been found in Rounds 2-3 and I think I would like to see the Cowboys target one there. I am not doing a RB higher than that. Personally. But, I do see the Cowboys are discussing him, so who knows? That would just be quite a departure from what they have been doing as a team-wide philosophy over the last 24 months.

So, pretty cuckoo.

Q: Assuming nobody else gives Hardy a shot, think the Cowboys would get desperate enough to re-sign him to another one-year incentive-laden deal?

I sure hope not. They keep giving us indications that they don't want to do another year with that guy in their facility. If that is the case, then money should not be the decision making key. It should be his presence. Also, if he wasn't to their liking when they were handing him a massive check, should we assume he will clean up his act for significantly less money? It doesn't make sense at all. I don't see him at any price, and I hope they stand their ground. If you need bodies, there are plenty of low maintenance bodies out there who may not be the same player, but you can get by with them and have no headaches.

Q: Does the Eagles' trade change anything from a Cowboys draft perspective?

Absolutely. It takes QB 100% of the board at #4, I assume. And it assures them that either Ramsey or Bosa will be available. So, depending on how much you worry about Tony Romo's health, this is actually great news.

Oh, and the Eagles going all-in again on another QB could work in Dallas' favor as well. Or, I suppose, you could have to deal with Carson Wentz 24 times in the next 12 years and that might not be fun. I guess we shall see.

Q: Does Sam Bradford have a right to be upset (he is, according to reports)?

Uh, no. He has been given countless chances and infinite amounts of cash. If he is upset as he sits on another big extension, then there will be low levels of sympathy from this laptop.

See you back in DFW on Tuesday. Draft Week!