Cowboysheelsreds053
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 15,896
- Reaction score
- 11,129
Let's not get carried away. Pollard played well but Zeke is the man.
This! Some I tell you.
Let's not get carried away. Pollard played well but Zeke is the man.
who told him he wouldn't make it in the nfl? he was 5-9 and played between 216-220. pollard is a good runner, but he's no zeke.
LOL...just hilarious.... "anyone that plays fantasy football knows this.."....Just go look at the league leaders in football. There is always a correlation and it's volume.
No name guys will produce at an elite level if they get volume.
Anyone that plays Fantasy Football knows this. Volume is the #1 factor for RB production.
What makes Pollard so quick is his limited usage. He's not built for pounding him into the line 25 times per game and would be less effective.
They do need to use him like yesterday, though. Some weeks they've barely used him at all.
From the start, I've liked this kid.
zeke had some pretty big runs yesterday. and if he continues to get the ball, he will have more.I think the point should be that Pollard needs to be much more involved in this offense because Zeke no longer has big runs.
2016 Zeke is still the best Zeke have seen and that guy is gone.
zeke is a chain mover. emmitt was a chain mover. little play guy? no way. best rb in the nfl.Zeke is great at the little play and that is great but this is a big play league and we're 7-7 with all of Zeke's greatness at the little play.
Where is the big play coming from with this team? The passing game?
zeke is a chain mover. emmitt was a chain mover. little play guy? no way. best rb in the nfl.
We are 7-7 because we have gone away from our identity. The lack of balance this year is the problem. Here is a breakdown of passing to rushing attempts in those losses: 295 passing vs 164 rushing. Of our 7 losses, only 2 times has Zeke averaged less than 3.8 yards a carry. Twice he has average over 5 yards a carry.Zeke is great at the little play and that is great but this is a big play league and we're 7-7 with all of Zeke's greatness at the little play.
Where is the big play coming from with this team? The passing game?
We are 7-7 because we have gone away from our identity. The lack of balance this year is the problem. Here is a breakdown of passing to rushing attempts in those losses: 295 passing vs 164 rushing. Of our 7 losses, only 2 times has Zeke averaged less than 3.8 yards a carry. Twice he has average over 5 yards a carry.
With 60-70 offensive snaps a game, I say Give Zeke the ball 18-22 times a game and he can get his numbers. Throw Pollard in there for 8-10 rushes as well for the big play threat. Now we have the clock killing ability with Zeke, and the home run with Pollard. Next year I would like to see 5 or so additional rushing attempts per game from Dak. Plenty of open field situations I have seen for him to take off for 8-12 yards an attempt. This leaves Dak 20-30 passing attempts a game. If the passing game isn't working, add a few more rushes. And vice versa.
It feels like we (fans and coaches alike) were so caught up in trying to prove Dak was a top 5 QB, that we forgot to think if this was the best thing for the team.
I certainly won't disagree with that. There were plenty of times this year (even for a series or 2) where Zeke didn't have it and Pollard would have had more success. I like them both.I just think if we play a team that has Zeke bottled up we need to see more Pollard in those types of games because he might spring a big play while Zeke just doesn't currently have it in him.
Zeke isn't creating his own space anymore and he's become a 3 yard and a cloud of dust type of back.
we haven't used zeke much because we keep falling behind early due to lousy defense. but in each of our last two losses, we scored our first possession due to running zeke. then we inexplicably stopped running. and we kept falling farther and farther behind. if we don't give up on the run, zeke will prove his worth. he's that good.Different era.
We're playing some great 90's football for 4 years now and we have nothing to show for it.
We need big plays.
I like Zeke and he is good but how is our team doing and how useful has he been in the playoffs?
The PLAYS where Zeke breaks tackles to move the chains, no way Pollard does that.The play he scored on at the end of the game, no way Zeke does that.
Pollard moves the chains on 25.7% of his carries and Zeke moves the chains on 25.5% of his carries. They are moving the chains at the same pace.zeke is a chain mover. emmitt was a chain mover. little play guy? no way. best rb in the nfl.
I never said Pollard was better but an argument could be made. My point is no RB is worth what we’re paying Zeke and since he demanded to be paid as the best then that is the standard I’m holder him to which he has fallen short of.Yo... what the hell are you talking about? Lol Making all types of assumptive statements? Putting words in my mouth. Is your premise that Pollard is better BECAUSE he had more yards on less carries? That imo is simply not accurate. It's like a mirage. To be sure I'm not sure if Pollard could be the bell cow for an entire game/season? I'm not sure. I'm just looking at his frame, running style and results when he gets his own series. I love the guy and it's tempting to think he's better than Zeke. I just really think we overlook what Zeke has done throughout the coarse of his career let alone yesterday. What Zeke does is what made Emmitt great. You point out the Bears game but you fail to mention ANY great game he's had? How many first downs he churns out to keep drives alive. How many critical blocks he makes in the passing game. Again I love Pollard and the added punch in our backfield but I'd be frightened if had to do it without Zeke.
He doesn't, shouldn't. That's my point. Allow him to continue to be the change of pace back.
I never said Pollard was better but an argument could be made. My point is no RB is worth what we’re paying Zeke and since he demanded to be paid as the best then that is the standard I’m holder him to which he has fallen short of.