News: Ezekiel Elliot Mysteriously Absent for Friday Camp Conditioning Test

[Little Jr]

Frankly, you're not paying a running back at all. The owner is. R Smith is not in the same county as Zeke. Strawman argumentsd don't persuade.

When I say "i" I'm saying if I was the owner. Lol

Your right, Smith isn't in the same country and that's my point. With Smith as the back up and starter when Zeke was out, The team still only rushed for .3 less yds a carry, rushed for 40 yds less a game but with 2 less carries a game which would account for another 50yds and putting them at 171 yds a game ahead of the 144 that they avg with Zeke in.

 

[Sydla]

I don’t know how to tell you this, but every one of your draft picks isn’t going all-Pro. Zeke is a once-in-a-generation. Fast, shifty RBs especially take a few years to really get their bearings in the nfl. Sproles, Shady, Willie Parker, Warrick Dunn. It’s the all-around bruiser types that hit the ground running, like Dickerson, like Elliot, like AP. Is it possible Pollard breaks out as a rookie? Sure. Is it worth throwing away an entire year of championship window to find out just so you can save a couple bucks on the salary cap?

I get that but what have these hit the ground running, elite style backs actually won?

Not much.

And the teams who have handed out these big deals to TBs, what have they really won? Not much. The Rams paid Gurley and made the SB, but Anderson was the go to guy when they made their run late.

It's a tough spot to be in. Personally, as great as Zeke is, I am just philosophically opposed to paying TBs big bucks.

 

[BourbonBalz]

Was Emmitt on his rookie deal when he held out? I don't recall a player with only 3 years under his belt doing this. With still 2 years on his contract, I consider what Zeke is doing highly irregular. Even if he is outplaying his contract, he needs to be honorable to it, and believe Jerry will take care of him next year when he is in his final contractual year. What many are calling leverage, I call undermining his own integrity. Just because he could holdout doesn't mean he should. I think this sours his relationship with Jerry and the rest of the Jones boys. I don't know what happens but I wouldn't put it past Jerry to find a trading partner in a team like the Raiders and just pass this headache on to them. We could have been a contender but now we are left with thoughts of what could have been. It ain't easy being a Cowboys fan.

Emmitt didn’t hold out. He was not under contract after the 92 season. His rookie contract had run its course and he was negotiating a new one. His situation is NOTHING like Elliott’s...

 

[BourbonBalz]

Emmitt was at the same point in his career - a three year veteran. But Emmitt also had a SB ring and didn't have a six-game suspension on his resume'.

More importantly to this topic, Emmitt was NOT under contract.

 

[BourbonBalz]

that is the only caveat to my argument that you cannot blame him for wanting to be paid. He is under contract. However, the contracts are not guaranteed and Jones could cut him tomorrow with no questions asked. He also knows how Jones kind of screwed with Emmitt Smith in 1993 so there is precedent for jacking with RBs.

False. Jerry didn’t screw anyone.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I get that but what have these hit the ground running, elite style backs actually won?

Not much.

And the teams who have handed out these big deals to TBs, what have they really won? Not much. The Rams paid Gurley and made the SB, but Anderson was the go to guy when they made their run late.

It's a tough spot to be in. Personally, as great as Zeke is, I am just philosophically opposed to paying TBs big bucks.

Your reply assumes all running backs are the same. And that the addition of an elite running back should guarantee a SB.

Not paying an eleite running back in the history of the Cowboys over the last twenty three years surely equaled Zero NYC Championship games. Yet Jones paid Emmitt top money for a RB and produced 2 championships. One without perhaps the second best coach ever for this team.

And except the first SB win by the Cowboys, all others had premiere RB's in Dorsett and Emmitt.

Not all things are equal, even on the same team from week to week.

One has to wonder what your opinion was when Emmitt got the big check. Before the league decided to assume a new posture about RB's. The new normal is not to pay the tailback. But that, again, assumes they are all then same. That philosophy would have never unseated Walter Peyton.

 

[Little Jr]

I remember people hyping Emmitt's backup Hambrick.
You remember... What do voluntary mean? Hambrick.

That was awesome.

I remember people hyping Joe Randle.
You remember... panty stealing Randle?

That was awesome too.

I remember 2017 and the team avg 4.2 y/a without Zeke and 4.5 with him. I remember they avg 121 without him with 2 less carries a game which would put them at 171 and 144 with Zeke.

I remember in 2015 with a former 1st round pick who never lived up two his draft status and most thought he was washed up, rushing for 1000+ yds for 4th in the NFL in just 10 starts. I remember as a team they rushed 4.6 y/a and 118 yds a game for 9th in the NFL. I remember they did that with absolute **** at QB.

That's what I remember.

 

[Corso]

I remember 2017 and the team avg 4.2 y/a without Zeke and 4.5 with him. I remember they avg 121 without him with 2 less carries a game which would put them at 171 and 144 with Zeke.

I remember in 2015 with a former 1st round pick who never lived up two his draft status and most thought he was washed up, rushing for 1000+ yds for 4th in the NFL in just 10 starts. I remember as a team they rushed 4.6 y/a and 118 yds a game for 9th in the NFL. I remember they did that with absolute **** at QB.

That's what I remember.

Ah yes... yards.
Lol.

 

[blueblood70]

It’s a tricky one, because the team has absolutely no incentive to honor their side of the contract, and never take the same heat players do when they cut them.

 

[JoeKing]

Emmitt didn’t hold out. He was not under contract after the 92 season. His rookie contract had run its course and he was negotiating a new one. His situation is NOTHING Elliott’ss..

Not true at all. There was a contract dispute and he held out for more money after his third year of a four-year contract.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-09-17-sp-36152-story.html

 

[Little Jr]

Ah yes... yards.
Lol.

That's it?

 

[Corso]

That's it?

I ask you the same question.
You bring up... just yards?
Laughable.

 

[BourbonBalz]

Not true at all. There was a contract dispute and he held out for more money after his third year of a four-year contract.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-09-17-sp-36152-story.html

Nope. Emmitt was NOT under contract at the time of his alleged “holdout”. You and the medi a can call it a holdout, but it wasn’t because he was not under contract. His rookie deal was for three years and he fulfilled it.

 

[Corso]

Nope. Emmitt was NOT under contract at the time of his alleged “holdout”.

How do you think this is going to turn out?
In the End?

 

[JoeKing]

Nope. Emmitt was NOT under contract at the time of his alleged “holdout”.

Yes, he was. Read the link I sent you. He was entering his 4th year in a 4-year contract.

 

[BourbonBalz]

How do you think this is going to turn out?
In the End?

No idea. If I had to guess, I think he’ll get a new contract before the season starts. I think that’s the wrong move for the Cowboys since he has two years left in his contract. If he wanted to holdout this time next year, I’d be much more in his corner. Giving him s new contract with two years left sets a very bad precedent for future players. We have several key players on the last year of their contract and they need to be first.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

I get that but what have these hit the ground running, elite style backs actually won?

Not much.

And the teams who have handed out these big deals to TBs, what have they really won? Not much. The Rams paid Gurley and made the SB, but Anderson was the go to guy when they made their run late.

It's a tough spot to be in. Personally, as great as Zeke is, I am just philosophically opposed to paying TBs big bucks.

Ravens backed up the brink truck for Rice literally the summer before they won the Lombardi.

Marshawn Lynch made 40m$ in Seattle after he was traded there which was bonkers money for a RB. He got them to two Super Bowls, and ironically had they focused more on their workhorse RB they’d have won 2 rings.

Marahall Faulk led the Rams to 2 Super Bowls and probably would have won both if not for spygate, and just before the first one they signed him to 7 years, 45m$ which was NUTS money back then.

Jerome Bettis was signed to the third largest RB deal in the league a few years before they won in 2005.

In 2006 the Steelers signed Willie Parker to a 4m$ a year deal, which at the time was top 5, which Shawn Alexander making the most at 7m$ a year. He won them a ring 2 years later.

Speaking of Shawn Alexander, if it wasnt for the absolutely heinous referees in that super bowl, we can swap Bettis’s Anecdote for his, and the single highest paid RB in league history at the time nearly did it. Even getting there like that would be confirmation that Zeke was the right move.

Then we can talk about all the other guys on big deals who almost did it as well. Stephen Davis with the Panthers, Frank Gore with the 9ers, Todd Gurley with the Rams....

So by your point, it literally happens all the time.

 

[Corso]

No idea. If I had to guess, I think he’ll get a new contract before the season starts. I think that’s the wrong move for the Cowboys since he has two years left in his contract. If he wanted to holdout this time next year, I’d be much more in his corner. Giving him s new contract with two years left sets a very bad precedent for future players. We have several key players on the last year of their contract and they need to be first.

I appreciate your honest answer.
I don't necessarily disagree with the whole and the half of it.

 

[BourbonBalz]

Yes, he was. Read the link I sent you. He was entering his 4th year in a 4-year contract.

LOL. You might want to take your own advice and read the article you referenced. No where in it does it say Emmitt was in the fourth year of a current contract. You know why? Because he had a three year contract that had expired. The only thing about a fourth year contract in that article is the one he ended up signing in 93, which was his second contract.

 

[DuncanIso]

Emmitt didn’t hold out. He was not under contract after the 92 season. His rookie contract had run its course and he was negotiating a new one. His situation is NOTHING like Elliott’s...

Did Emmitt play in the first 2 games of 1993?

Nope. 0-2

That's a hold out.

Also, he got paid.