Video: Murray led the NFL in yards, then retired after only 3 more seasons. What happened?

jazzcat22

Staff member
Messages
77,823
Reaction score
96,828
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
You don't seem to understand how the cap and money works.

Put simply. Say a company can pay its 5 employees no more than100 per year total for all 5. One employee demands 40 dollars. That leaves 60 dollars for the other 4 (15 dollars each). Now the one employee says I want 60 dollars. That means the other 4 employees have to share 40 dollars.

Every dollar that goes to Dak does not go to any other player. It is that simple. The money is not a battle between Jerry and the player.

Would you be happy going to work when one employee gets 20% of the total allowable payroll and does not perform while you get 1% of the total allowable payroll?

CEO's get $100 million for leaving a company that he / she screwed up, on top of the $300 million they normally got paid.
Yet the grunts get minimum wages. A new CEO comes in and gets $400 million, but the workers still get minimum wage.

That is just the way it is everywhere. Doesn't mean it is right, but that is the way of the world.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,206
Reaction score
48,003
I watched this and some good HL, but the commentary is kinda lame and timid.
I always liked murray and he was great in 2014, and they should have signed him .
He wasnt burnt out , we had the OL, but when they let murray go, that led to changing the Off , and Tony getting
the broke collarbone.

Had they kept murray it would have been a continuation of 2014 and they might have made it to the SB.
If they had won a SB it would have been worth paying murray.
I am positive that if they had signed murray tony doesnt get hurt.

Murray broke OJ's record,and jim browns record, for 100 yd games in a row, and emmit's single season total yds record.
Also he still holds the single game record for the cowboys.

Mr. party boy has not come close to any of these records, but jones pays him 15 mil a year while in a pass first offense!
They could have had murray for 8 mil a year. But they got cheap and also as they say in this video chose dez over
murray lol and look how that turned out! Dez gets hurt in game one and was never the same. later tony gets hurt
trying to pass instead of handing off to murray.

when they let murray go they threw a SB chance out the window.
I didn't have a huge problem letting Murray walk, but geez, not even trying to replace him was dumber'n dog poop.
 

Ranching

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,295
Reaction score
107,646
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
You don't seem to understand how the cap and money works.

Put simply. Say a company can pay its 5 employees no more than100 per year total for all 5. One employee demands 40 dollars. That leaves 60 dollars for the other 4 (15 dollars each). Now the one employee says I want 60 dollars. That means the other 4 employees have to share 40 dollars.

Every dollar that goes to Dak does not go to any other player. It is that simple. The money is not a battle between Jerry and the player.

Would you be happy going to work when one employee gets 20% of the total allowable payroll and does not perform while you get 1% of the total allowable payroll?
Oh brother! Obviously, you don't get my point.
 

jazzcat22

Staff member
Messages
77,823
Reaction score
96,828
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I didn't have a huge problem letting Murray walk, but geez, not even trying to replace him was dumber'n dog poop.

So was the idea of RBBC, it was just as dumb as to why they did not try to replace him. Well they did, they thought McFadden would help with the RBBC.
However that led to them drafting Zeke, so it worked out eventually.
 

TwoCentPlain

Numbnuts
Messages
15,169
Reaction score
11,084
CEO's get $100 million for leaving a company that he / she screwed up, on top of the $300 million they normally got paid.
Yet the grunts get minimum wages. A new CEO comes in and gets $400 million, but the workers still get minimum wage.

That is just the way it is everywhere. Doesn't mean it is right, but that is the way of the world.

You are missing the point entirely. It is about the cap which does not allow a team to pay more than the cap. Total salary is limited. Therefore, all dollars must be shared by the 53 players. Management is exempt from the NFL cap.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,206
Reaction score
48,003
CEO's get $100 million for leaving a company that he / she screwed up, on top of the $300 million they normally got paid.
Yet the grunts get minimum wages. A new CEO comes in and gets $400 million, but the workers still get minimum wage.

That is just the way it is everywhere. Doesn't mean it is right, but that is the way of the world.
Yeah, but that's not what this is about.
 

Jake

Beyond tired of Jerry
Messages
36,067
Reaction score
84,350
Put simply. Say a company can pay its 5 employees no more than100 per year total for all 5. One employee demands 40 dollars. That leaves 60 dollars for the other 4 (15 dollars each). Now the one employee says I want 60 dollars. That means the other 4 employees have to share 40 dollars.

Every dollar that goes to Dak does not go to any other player. It is that simple. The money is not a battle between Jerry and the player.

Thank you that rudimentary explanation. I, for one, couldn't possibly have figured that out. :muttley:

I've got news for you. Every business has a cap - it's called a budget. I know because I prepared the annual budget of a 200 employee company for 25 years. Every dollar that goes to one person is a dollar less for everyone else. I'll tell you something that never happened. I'll go so far as to guess you've never done this, either:

"Jake, I'll take 20% less so Schmidlap can have more money. He and I work so well together. I'd hate to see him leave."

And yet, some fans expect athletes - with short careers that could end at any moment - to do that. That's just letting your fanboy emotions get in front of your adult brain, as no adult (including yourself) would do such a thing with their own compensation.

So, money is more important to you than family, life, friends, winning, everything?

Yeah, because that's exactly what was said. :rolleyes:

I'll also refer you to the above example, because I'll go out on another limb and suggest you wouldn't do it, either. So does that mean money is more important to you than family, life, friends, and success? Or does that rule only apply to "greedy" athletes?
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,206
Reaction score
48,003
Money to support my family is definitely more important. It's not for you?
That's a different discussion. The money to support your family box has already been checked. Making 10 million/year or 12million/year makes zero difference as far as supporting your family.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
45,206
Reaction score
48,003
Thank you that rudimentary explanation. I, for one, couldn't possibly have figured that out. :muttley:

I've got news for you. Every business has a cap - it's called a budget. I know because I prepared the annual budget of a 200 employee company for 25 years. Every dollar that goes to one person is a dollar less for everyone else. I'll tell you something that never happened. I'll go so far as to guess you've never done this, either:

"Jake, I'll take 20% less so Schmidlap can have more money. He and I work so well together. I'd hate to see him leave."

And yet, some fans expect athletes - with short careers that could end at any moment - to do that. That's just letting your fanboy emotions get in front of your adult brain, as no adult (including yourself) would do such a thing with their own compensation.



Yeah, because that's exactly what was said. :rolleyes:

I'll also refer you to the above example, because I'll go out on another limb and suggest you wouldn't do it, either. So does that mean money is more important to you than family, life, friends, and success? Or does that rule only apply to "greedy" athletes?
I already have taken less.

You're giving arguments that don't fit.
 

MountaineerCowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,276
Reaction score
64,967
When you ignore what actually happened and just make things up everything is simple.
What's the saying? Something along the lines of "it's hard to wake up and work put when you're sleeping in silk pajamas"?
 

jazzcat22

Staff member
Messages
77,823
Reaction score
96,828
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
You are missing the point entirely. It is about the cap which does not allow a team to pay more than the cap. Total salary is limited. Therefore, all dollars must be shared by the 53 players. Management is exempt from the NFL cap.

Not missing the point, I know how the cap works. I was referring to the % difference you were describing as to 20% to 1%
All or most companies have a salary / wage budget and break down as well. They still need to pay all employees within that budget / cap.
 

blueblood70

Well-Known Member
Messages
39,078
Reaction score
27,186
what did he play 7 seasons? had over 7k yards and 49tds made some good money,

thats a solid career..not many players outside of QBs have long careers..7-10 years on average, so he made himself a career in the NFL
 

jazzcat22

Staff member
Messages
77,823
Reaction score
96,828
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Yeah, but that's not what this is about.

It is the same principal as to the wide range of difference in pay. 20% vs. 1% of the available resources.

CEO 20% office worker 1%
QB 20% ST's player 1%

all needs to fit within a budget.
 

Ranching

Well-Known Member
Messages
43,295
Reaction score
107,646
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
That's a different discussion. The money to support your family box has already been checked. Making 10 million/year or 12million/year makes zero difference as far as supporting your family.
Not when your career can end on a moments notice
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,689
Reaction score
15,697
I didn't have a huge problem letting Murray walk, but geez, not even trying to replace him was dumber'n dog poop.
If it aint broken , dont fix it ! lol
They had a good thing going with murray and the run alot offense, which took pressure off tony, and he didnt have to pass as much.
They knew what they had in murray, and he had a rep after that year, which would make every team think stopping him
was the key, which opens up play action passing.
Defense's were not afraid of the 2 rb's they replaced murray with, and the dallas run game was not as good as it was in 14.

I watched the seattle game in seattle, from 14, and on the drive that took the lead in 4th, it was all murray, just handing off to him with I think a 14 yd td run to cap it off. And that was on the legion of boom! They couldnt stop him.

I really think , had they kept murray they would have contended for SB that year.

All that said, I think jones boys felt it was the OL and any rb would do, and that murray had too many carries that year.
and also aikman had made a big deal out of the strip on murray in GB playoff game, so that might have had an effect on
jones boys, also murray had the 5-6 fumbles during season that people made a big deal out of.
I think elliot had 6 fumbles in 19 , and no one made a big deal out of those.

Thing is that year and previous off season DM had started working out with jason witten, and drinking all the water,
and that helped him with injuries and wear and tear.

With murray the OL, romo, and crazy dez they had a good thing going, they were hard to stop, and really murray
was more important to that offense than dez was.
 
Top