McFadden > Randle

CATCH17 said:
I can't imagine any 34 year old back getting a team through a season.

I may be wrong but I just don't see him as a week in week out RB.
Click to expand...

I think some of the others that have said we're waiting on the deeper cuts are spot on. My impatience with this whole rbbc thing is showing. Apologies to all. It tis what it tis.
 
Bleu Star said:
Actually no. But I have always been true to where I think we are going into a season.
Click to expand...

But wouldn't it make more sense to wait and see? Because if the rbbc turns out to be a killer you and a lot of others are going to be looking really silly when you're so adamant that you know exactly how it's gonna turn out.
 
Jstopper said:
But wouldn't it make more sense to wait and see? Because if the rbbc turns out to be a killer you and a lot of others are going to be looking really silly when you're so adamant that you know exactly how it's gonna turn out.
Click to expand...

It isn't how it turns out. It is why the decision was made.

It was made to save salary cap space when we have plenty to spare.

We turned a potential strength into a question mark because of the salary cap.

If we kept Murray we would have no need for Fred Jackson and still could have had DMC over Dunbar.
 
bkight13 said:
It isn't how it turns out. It is why the decision was made.

It was made to save salary cap space when we have plenty to spare.

We turned a potential strength into a question mark because of the salary cap.

If we kept Murray we would have no need for Fred Jackson and still could have had DMC over Dunbar.
Click to expand...

Untrue. Murray had nearly 500 touches last season. Historically RBs struggle after that kind of work load. So saying 'if we had Murray' is inaccurate - If we had a healthy Murray. And the fact that last season was his first full season, combined with the tendency for RBs to suffer a downturn in performance or an injury following the kind of workload he had, makes it obvious that the odds are stacked against him being fully healthy and performing at a high level again this year. So we would have been paying a lot of money for a guy who, at least looking at the history of RBs with that kind of work load, would leave us in the same position we are in right now - trusting Randle to handle a large portion of the load.

Murray's injury history, combined with his outrageous workload last year, would have made him a major question mark anyway. But it would have been an 8 million dollar question mark.
 
JDSmith said:
Untrue. Murray had nearly 500 touches last season. Historically RBs struggle after that kind of work load. So saying 'if we had Murray' is inaccurate - If we had a healthy Murray. And the fact that last season was his first full season, combined with the tendency for RBs to suffer a downturn in performance or an injury following the kind of workload he had, makes it obvious that the odds are stacked against him being fully healthy and performing at a high level again this year. So we would have been paying a lot of money for a guy who, at least looking at the history of RBs with that kind of work load, would leave us in the same position we are in right now - trusting Randle to handle a large portion of the load.

Murray's injury history, combined with his outrageous workload last year, would have made him a major question mark anyway. But it would have been an 8 million dollar question mark.
Click to expand...

Well said!
 
I love lamp;
JDSmith said:
Untrue. Murray had nearly 500 touches last season. Historically RBs struggle after that kind of work load. So saying 'if we had Murray' is inaccurate - If we had a healthy Murray. And the fact that last season was his first full season, combined with the tendency for RBs to suffer a downturn in performance or an injury following the kind of workload he had, makes it obvious that the odds are stacked against him being fully healthy and performing at a high level again this year. So we would have been paying a lot of money for a guy who, at least looking at the history of RBs with that kind of work load, would leave us in the same position we are in right now - trusting Randle to handle a large portion of the load.

Murray's injury history, combined with his outrageous workload last year, would have made him a major question mark anyway. But it would have been an 8 million dollar question mark.
Click to expand...



Okay fine. I could argue against it, but okay . So, what is the better option? A question about Demarco Murray not showing up, or a question mark about if Randle\Dmc can handle the load? In a season we should be pushing for a SB?

I know what DM teammates would say about it....including Romo/Dez/Witten
 
Jstopper said:
But wouldn't it make more sense to wait and see? Because if the rbbc turns out to be a killer you and a lot of others are going to be looking really silly when you're so adamant that you know exactly how it's gonna turn out.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem looking silly. Once again, I always remain true to what I feel & I won't apologize to anyone or flex to fit into any other thought patterns. I'm just as hopeful as you but definitely nowhere near as confident in our approach to the RB position going in. So you can continue to maintain a wonderfully positive feel regarding that situation and I will continue to do what I have done for many years now. That's go with my instincts and hope for the best.
 
Fred Jackson isn't good enough for Dallas but, he's good enough for Seattle....wellalllrighteeTHEn!
 
JDSmith said:
I think the biggest difference is that McFadden is very good at blitz pickup.
Click to expand...

Which is the main reason he'll likely be starting on opening day. The Cowboys had issues with the blitz last season so they'll see some blitzes this season. Randle has had some issues in pass protection giving up a sack last week.
 
theogt said:
I get the feeling it doesn't matter one bit who we put back there. We're going to run the ball well.
Click to expand...

The back matters but I still believe the Cowboys will run the ball well but not as well as last year.
 
JDSmith said:
Murray's injury history, combined with his outrageous workload last year, would have made him a major question mark anyway. But it would have been an 8 million dollar question mark.
Click to expand...

All those carries show that the FO already made up their mind about keeping Murray.

If Randle was a suitable replacement he should have handled 150+ more carries.

And AGAIN, Murray would have a 4m cap hit, not 8m.

RB could be a strength instead of a question.

Murray/Randle/DMC/Vereen or Murray/Randle/Dunbar/Rookie
 
CT Dal Fan said:
Fred Jackson is good enough to backup Marshawn Lynch in Seattle. He is not good enough to come in here and replace ole-whats-his-name now in Philly.
Click to expand...

lmao...who you talking bout, Willis?

(stupid cowboy fans)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 94 more.
Total: 3,578 (members: 194, guests: 3,384)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,734
Messages
13,828,829
Members
23,781
Latest member
Vloh10
Back
Top