News: BTB: ESPN: Could There Be A Cowboys-DeMarco Murray Reunion In 2016?

NewsBot

New Member
Messages
111,281
Reaction score
2,947
usa-today-8316696.0.jpg

The odds of a Cowboys-Murray reunion may be slim, but the potential benefits are many.

In his Five Wonders series, ESPN's Todd Archer wonders this week whether the recently benched DeMarco Murray could find his way back to Dallas. Here's Archer's rationale:


The Philadelphia Eagles demoted DeMarco Murray last week, which is stunning considering the $21 million they guaranteed the running back last March. That’s how bad the season has gone for Murray, who has 163 carries for 569 yards and four touchdowns.

Could the Eagles do the unthinkable and part ways with Murray after the season? The salary cap makes it almost impossible to even think about. His 2016 $7 million base salary is guaranteed. But let’s say the Eagles choose to do it. I wonder if the Cowboys would jump on the chance to re-sign him. Actually, I more than wonder it. I would expect the Cowboys to get involved in the mix.

The Cowboys miss Murray badly, and it’s clear Murray misses the Cowboys. The Eagles’ offense is just not a good fit for Murray. The Cowboys’ offense is a perfect fit. Now, what kind of contract would you give Murray, who would be a year older, although not with the wear of a big-carry season? The Cowboys offered Murray $6 million per year with $12 million guaranteed after he led the NFL with 1,845 yards rushing.

There's an unlimited list of things not to like about the Eagles, but one thing they've done well in the past is their cap management. Sure, GM Chip Kelly has done his darndest to get rid of any excess cap space, but he hasn't succeeded yet, so the Eagles look to be carrying at least $20 M in free cap space into 2016. Yes, they'll probably need to sign an NFL-quality QB with that money (they currently don't have such a player on their roster), but that still leaves a lot of wiggle room, and that's without restructuring any of the big contracts on their roster. If the Eagles want to cut Murray, they can do it without blinking an eye.

For the Cowboys, re-signing Murray could have multiple benefits:

  • As Archer writes, Murray is a "perfect fit" for the Cowboys offense. And even though Murray is not getting any younger, he'll still be a good between-the-tackles runner.
  • Depending on what kind of offset language Murray's contract in Philly contains, the Cowboys might essentially be getting Murray for free in 2016, as the Eagles will be on the hook for his $7 million salary. The Cowboys got a similar "deal" on Brandon Weeden, though in that specific case they overpaid, regardless of how much money they saved. The Cowboys paid Weeden the NFL minimum salary for two years and the Browns continued to pay the difference between the minimum salary and the guaranteed part of his original contract. Imagine that: Murray plays for the Cowboys for $7 million in 2016 and the Eagles will pay about $6 million of that. Sweetness.
  • Regardless of what you think of Darren McFadden and/or Robert Turbin, the Cowboys will probably have to go out in free agency for an extra running back in 2016 - even if they take a running back in the draft. The advantage of signing Murray, if he is indeed released by the Eagles, is that players released by their orginal team won't count as compensatory free agents and won't impact your comp pick totals.

For the Cowboys, re-signing Murray makes so much sense they should "jump on the chance to re-sign him," as Archer writes. The real question here is how badly do the Eagles want to get rid of Murray? Are they willing to swallow $13 million in dead money just because things didn't work out as hoped in year one? And imagine the amount of clownface cake they'd have to eat for letting Murray get back to Dallas.

Taken together, that may simply be too much even for that organization.

Continue reading...
 

Setackin

radioactivecowboy88
Messages
3,858
Reaction score
4,612
Y wouldn't the Eagles try and trade him in this senerio? Bills raiders come to mind
 

windward

NFL Historian
Messages
18,681
Reaction score
4,533
Do we have another Josh Hamilton situation brewing here?
 

Hoofbite

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,865
Reaction score
11,566
yea, it really is. his 2016 salary is guaranteed, the Eagles would be better served keeping him and not playing him all season as opposed to paying him $7 million to help us or any other team beat the Eagles.

If he's not a good fit then he can't help their team. If you're paying either way, no point in paying someone to mope around and bring people down. Better off just moving on.
 

Setackin

radioactivecowboy88
Messages
3,858
Reaction score
4,612
You think he has trade value right now?

Trading him for anything, to a team u choose is better (from eagles standpoint) than releasing and potentially paying him to play for a rival
 

Junglist

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,326
Reaction score
1,294
This is looking more and more like a move with the ulterior motive to simply take Murray away from Dallas.

I agree. They made a good point on the radio today. We were worried about the wear and tear on Murray. In Philly, he's essentially had a year off because of how little they use him. I'm not really for resigning Murray, but that tidbit does make it a little more tempting.
 

Manwiththeplan

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,268
Reaction score
7,763
If he's not a good fit then he can't help their team. If you're paying either way, no point in paying someone to mope around and bring people down. Better off just moving on.

Not really, it's all fine and dandy until he helps Dallas win a divisional title. I'd welcome him back here, but if I'm Philly, I trade him to the AFC or I keep him. Not like Ryan Matthews is an example of durability.
 

Manwiththeplan

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,268
Reaction score
7,763
This is looking more and more like a move with the ulterior motive to simply take Murray away from Dallas.

I do think this played a large part of it. Last year, Sproles was far more effective than McCoy. Now obviously Sproles can't carry the ball as many times as McCoy, but in his limited role, he was better, so I get parting ways with McCoy. But Ryan Matthews really should have been enough to go with Sproles. I don't really think Murray was on Chip's radar until he got Bradford and then Bradford began to sell the idea. Taking him from Dallas likely tipped the balance towards signing him.
 

rynochop

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,763
Reaction score
4,657
Would he clear waivers? I don't think he'd be all that good here either, he got paid, what he was looking for
 

Toruk_Makto

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,242
Reaction score
17,336
There were people here before we lost Murray claiming we had to keep him because he'd be better than Peterson who "hadn't done anything since 2012."

It was a different time.
 

rynochop

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,763
Reaction score
4,657
There were people here before we lost Murray claiming we had to keep him because he'd be better than Peterson who "hadn't done anything since 2012."

It was a different time.

Lol, yeah I remember those folks..wonder where they've been
 
Top