wileedog
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 11,356
- Reaction score
- 2,393
Wow the coaches will do any thing to get rid of our current RBs.
If only they had that mentality in the offseason.
Wow the coaches will do any thing to get rid of our current RBs.
Our they could be playing without their two best offensive players allowing teams to put 9 guys in the box?
If only they had that mentality in the offseason.
How many are in this box? 9? How big is this box?
The giants and eagles faced us with Romo and partially Dez and we were very ineffective running the ball.
How often do you really think teams are playing us with 9 in the box? Any play where we had Beasley in the game would mean you cant have 9 in the box or someone wouldnt be covered at all. I dont believe the box has been this loaded. 7 or 8 maybe....but 9? Even Weeden could find an open man against a 9 man box.
He is a big fellow.Anybody else see this? Know about him? Saw him play last weekend.
Chrun baby churn.
So many around here complaining about RB corp should give the FO some credit for bring in Michael and now Smith. At least we aren't sitting still. We're making moves and addressing the situation.
Meh, how many running back KS do they need. We don't use the ones we have !
(Unless they gonna cut someone)...
You might want to edit this post..LOL.
How many are in this box? 9? How big is this box?
The giants and eagles faced us with Romo and partially Dez and we were very ineffective running the ball.
How often do you really think teams are playing us with 9 in the box? Any play where we had Beasley in the game would mean you cant have 9 in the box or someone wouldnt be covered at all. I dont believe the box has been this loaded. 7 or 8 maybe....but 9? Even Weeden could find an open man against a 9 man box.
Judging from the RBs we were interested in - Lamichael James, Isaiah Pead, and now Smith -- this is exclusively a ST signing. All these guys return kickoffs. I dont expect Smith to challenge our top 3 RBs. THere is a chance, though, that we decide to move on from McFadden because of his weak pass pro and adding little to the running game.
The Cowboys ran the ball just fine against the Giants. Even though Randle left some yards on the field he still ended up with 70 yards rushing I believe and would've had well over 100 if they didn't have to abandon the run because they fell behind. They didn't run it well against Philadelphia, but Romo only played half the game and they didn't run it well against them last year even when Romo played both games. Even if Beasley is out there he's really the only receiver you have to worry about because Weeden won't look down field to Williams or Butler before he hurt his hammy with the exception of that one big play.
Chrun baby churn.
So many around here complaining about RB corp should give the FO some credit for bring in Michael and now Smith. At least we aren't sitting still. We're making moves and addressing the situation.
We ran for 80 yards and averaged 3.5 YPC against the Giants.
Not the way I define fine.
It's been 5 games now. How many more excuses are we going to have to make.
We don't need excuses. We need our QB back, and we need to be getting turnovers. If we had those two things, the rushing would either be there, or it wouldn't matter.
We ran for 80 yards and averaged 3.5 YPC against the Giants.
Not the way I define fine.
It's been 5 games now. How many more excuses are we going to have to make.
We ran for 80 yards and averaged 3.5 YPC against the Giants.
Not the way I define fine.
It's been 5 games now. How many more excuses are we going to have to make.
Did you miss the part where we fell behind and had to go into passing and two minute mode?
I think the Cowboys are looking to do two things, get rid of McFadden, and find somebody to replace Dunbar.