Can we really go into the season with two change of pace backs as our top two runningbacks

[Adreme]

What does this have to do with WR? WRs are not nearly as plug and play. Nuances in route running. Nuances in plays. In adjustments. And in general its a much harder position to play.

I mean you are claiming that you could argue the Cowboys have the best WR trio. I am saying that is a BIG reach. A favorable argument puts them borderline top 5 but trying to go higher involves a lot of using the word if. Such as If Gallup can return to what he was 2 years ago. If Cooks can bounce back and be a quality 2 and if Lamb can take another step forward then you can make the argument they are among the best of the best. That is a lot of ifs.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

I mean you are claiming that you could argue the Cowboys have the best WR trio. I am saying that is a BIG reach. A favorable argument puts them borderline top 5 but trying to go higher involves a lot of using the word if. Such as If Gallup can return to what he was 2 years ago. If Cooks can bounce back and be a quality 2 and if Lamb can take another step forward then you can make the argument they are among the best of the best. That is a lot of ifs.

What WR corps isn't this true for?

After Cincinatti, Philly and I guess Miami, it's all ifs. Idk if Dallas is top-5 or not, but you can make the same case for Dallas as just about any other team in the conversation. Dallas has 3 1,000-yard WRs, it's tough to make an argument that, sya, LAC or Minnesota has a better group without using "if"

 

[kskboys]

Calling Tony pollard a “change of pace” back is kind of disrespectful.

He had 193 Carries for 1000 yards last year. He has close to 800 yards the year prior

Yeah he was the 2nd string RB because the cowboys had Zeke. But If you watched pollard play. You should have seen him show the ability to be a starting RB. Not just a “change of pace” guy.

What they really mean is a tandem back. Just using the wrong wording.

 

[CowboyRoy]

We need a grinder to get the tough yards and goalline carries. I love Duece and Pollard but they are smaller backs. Can we give Luepke some more opportunities to see what we have.

I see you still havent learned anything

 

[CowboyRoy]

We need a grinder to get the tough yards and goalline carries. I love Duece and Pollard but they are smaller backs. Can we give Luepke some more opportunities to see what we have.

We dont actually

 

[CowboyRoy]

Tbh if Davis / Rico can’t separate themselves and continue to play poorly, zeke will be back.

Bwaaaaaa!!!

 

[kskboys]

Philly did just fine with all there scat backs

They use their QB as the short yardage back.

Come on, people, think.

Mahomes is the best QB in the NFL. The better the QB, the less you need around him. Not a good comparison.

Cincy has Joe Mixon, who is both a power and a speed back. Rare.

ATL just took Bijan w/ the 8th pick because he does both.

Pacheco is a rare 7th round find who can do both. He runs like Marshawn Lynch.

 

[kskboys]

We dont actually

We do actually.

Every team needs a way to get short yardage. Philly uses Hurts that way. KC uses Pacheco. Before him, they used a 1st rounder trying to get a RB.

Legarrate Blount won several super bowls simply because he is an excellent short yardage back. Has the game changed that much since 2017?

 

[America's Cowboy]

 

[CowboyRoy]

We do actually.

Every team needs a way to get short yardage. Philly uses Hurts that way. KC uses Pacheco. Before him, they used a 1st rounder trying to get a RB.

Legarrate Blount won several super bowls simply because he is an excellent short yardage back. Has the game changed that much since 2017?

short yardage is about the blocking
Mostly

Size can help as can vision, quickness, and making people miss.

I actually think a kid like deuce could be good at it. Pollard too.

 

[kskboys]

You clearly dont understand what short yardage is about. Its about the blocking.

It's not. When you're running for short yardage, the other team is squushed up inside. It's about quickness to the LOS and the ability to keep the legs churning w/ power. No matter what, you won't find many holes in short yardage downs. Guys who can't run thru tackles are notedly bad at short yardage runs.

Hoping Hunter can do it, haven't see that ability from any of our other RBs.

 

[Mr_437]

It's not about short yardage. It's about who we lean on if TP goes down. He's not exactly a proven durable work horse. I wouldn't say he's fragile either, just that we don't know.

Fair take. I think the unknown has ppl uncomfortable. I agree, it should be about next man up if TP isn't available.

 

[Adreme]

What WR corps isn't this true for?

After Cincinatti, Philly and I guess Miami, it's all ifs. Idk if Dallas is top-5 or not, but you can make the same case for Dallas as just about any other team in the conversation. Dallas has 3 1,000-yard WRs, it's tough to make an argument that, sya, LAC or Minnesota has a better group without using "if"

You kind of argued my point for me by listing 3 teams that are better without the word “if”. The argument was that there is argument for Dallas having the best WR trio in the NFL. Even in your reply to me you demonstrate that there really is not an argument for that.

 

[starfan1]

It's not. When you're running for short yardage, the other team is squushed up inside. It's about quickness to the LOS and the ability to keep the legs churning w/ power. No matter what, you won't find many holes in short yardage downs. Guys who can't run thru tackles are notedly bad at short yardage runs.

Hoping Hunter can do it, haven't see that ability from any of our other RBs.

https://www.rotowire.com/football/player/tony-pollard-13590
I think you underestimate tonys ability. He was a league leader in YAC yards. Unless youre referring to his back ups. I think the cowboys actually relied on zeke by the goal line by design but Im pretty sure pollard had more YAC. Zeke elliott was a beast in short yardage he was king of if you need 2 yard zeke will get it it.If you need 5 hell get 2.

 

[CowboyRoy]

It's not. When you're running for short yardage, the other team is squushed up inside. It's about quickness to the LOS and the ability to keep the legs churning w/ power. No matter what, you won't find many holes in short yardage downs. Guys who can't run thru tackles are notedly bad at short yardage runs.

Hoping Hunter can do it, haven't see that ability from any of our other RBs.

Like i said

 

[BlindFaith]

I mean you are claiming that you could argue the Cowboys have the best WR trio. I am saying that is a BIG reach. A favorable argument puts them borderline top 5 but trying to go higher involves a lot of using the word if. Such as If Gallup can return to what he was 2 years ago. If Cooks can bounce back and be a quality 2 and if Lamb can take another step forward then you can make the argument they are among the best of the best. That is a lot of ifs.

Sorry, thought we were talking about backup RBs

 

[CowboyRoy]

It's not. When you're running for short yardage, the other team is squushed up inside. It's about quickness to the LOS and the ability to keep the legs churning w/ power. No matter what, you won't find many holes in short yardage downs. Guys who can't run thru tackles are notedly bad at short yardage runs.

Hoping Hunter can do it, haven't see that ability from any of our other RBs.

So you think the biggest key to short yardage success is the big size of the RB?

Thats ridiculous. Size can help if you have the other things needed. If not it does little.

”no matter what there are no holes in short yardage“?

you seem lost on this subject.

 

[Typhus]

Pollard is listed at 209 on the Cowboys website. It would not surprise me if they have it wrong but maybe that is why people consider him a smaller back. He also looked a lot more slender next to Zeke.

He is right around that weight daily right now.

 

[kskboys]

So you think the biggest key to short yardage success is the big size of the RB?

Thats ridiculous. Size can help if you have the other things needed. If not it does little.

”no matter what there are no holes in short yardage“?

you seem lost on this subject.

Size? No. Quickness to the hole and ability to run through tackles.

You were definitely lost if you were trying to consider a thought other than your own!!!!!!!!

And here's how lost you are: In general, gazelles at RB do not make good short yardage backs, as they aren't built for it. You are definitely lost on this subject.

BTW, why do we gotta start the stupid little childish insults war? I thought we were having a discussion, dude.

 

[Typhus]

So you think the biggest key to short yardage success is the big size of the RB?

Thats ridiculous. Size can help if you have the other things needed. If not it does little.

”no matter what there are no holes in short yardage“?

you seem lost on this subject.

Ya, the only coastal part of this offense will be MM including several TE and FB options available now.
Peeps that are worried about RB depth are the same that worry about LB depth...lol