Cowboys RB options

[darthseinfeld]

This is the way the draft fell for us. I would say

Yeldon Vs. Jones but they felt Yeldon went too high as is so he was probably never even in the convo for 27th

Gregory VS Tevin Coleman and Duke

In both instances we took the better player at each spot. Instead of a solid but not spectacular HB we took a potential #1 CB who may a quality FS starter as well and a RDE with 15 sack potential.

After that you are looking at players who where very questionable starter candidates. I think the only 2 backs that were on the board that could be quality NFL starters are David Cobb, Mike Davis and Karlos Williams who wasnt in anyones radar

 

[starfrombirth]

The RBs from the draft are listed at the bottom.

Gurley is the man. Most people knew this before he was drafted.
Gordon has a horrific 4 fumbles. His college fumble rate was bad also.
Yeldon is doing well but that's probably because of his Right Tackle.
Abdullah with 4 fumbles. His college fumble rate was the worst.


[/code]

How about Karlos Williams from FSU... now with Buffalo? That's who I wanted... SMH!

 

[TwoDeep3]

Ranking 6th would still make it a strength of the team, wouldn't it?

No. It wouldn't. You still don't get what we had last year and how the running game was the focal point of the offense.

Stats are meaningless in this argument. Yous till believe in your strawman signature, as if that one play means anything to what we had last year.

But keep on promoting the idea that we didn't need a playmaker. There is something to be said about consistency of opinion.

 

[xwalker]

No. It wouldn't. You still don't get what we had last year and how the running game was the focal point of the offense.

Stats are meaningless in this argument. Yous till believe in your strawman signature, as if that one play means anything to what we had last year.

But keep on promoting the idea that we didn't need a playmaker. There is something to be said about consistency of opinion.

The stats show that your emotions cause you to believe that the running game is not functioning really well this season.

The running game didn't save them last year when Weed had to start.

 

[xwalker]

How about Karlos Williams from FSU... now with Buffalo? That's who I wanted... SMH!

Good value at this point.

 

[TwoDeep3]

The stats show that your emotions cause you to believe that the running game is not functioning really well this season.

The running game didn't save them last year when Weed had to start.

It is about moving the sticks. Getting ahead of third down. What you fail to acknowledge is that with Murray, they had a way to protect both the defense and the passing game by forcing eight in tyhje box and sometimes more.

This year the running game disappears in the second half. Granted, the team doesn't have Romo. And that is important. But the dirty yards are just not there. This was a cohesive team last year and the brain trust, and fans like you thought just anyone can step in and run the ball.

But there is a leadership factor you seem to never accept that Murray brought to the team.

He needed this team as much as they needed him. In the end both lost out. And your defense of your position doesn't change anything.

They allowed a play maker to walk because of money they could have positioned to pay. But elected not to because the brain trust believes, like you, that all things are the same. That anyone could do what Murray did.

And they relied on an immature guy who is no longer with the team, an undersized guy who is on IR, and a RB from Oakland that ios showing something, but not in the second half when it counts.

I disagree with your position, your stats, and the propaganda your signature posits as truth.

But other than that, you're an olkay guy with me. You still like the team.

 

[Derinyar]

Murray was a good back who had a great season last year. Murray is a good back who's having a god awful season this year. I think the team pegged Murray as a good back, but not a special back. Not a Peterson type of player. And I think they've decided that second contracts for non elite RBs are a bad idea, which there's plenty of evidence to show with a little bit showing the other way. Despite this I'm pretty sure there's credible evidence that they made a decent offer to him. That offer was beaten by the Eagles, as I guess Chippy still thinks that he's in recruiting wars and he took a guy away from us for nothing. I don't touch that Eagles offer for him, because I just don't think he's likely to stay healthy and productive long term with his running style.

I think we'd all now agree that the problem is that having Joe Randle as the primary option going into the year was probably a bad idea. Not really because of his talent/play but because his head is weak. I think they wanted a RB in the draft. I think once Gurley was gone they weren't going to spend a 1st on a RB. So that decision was Jones vs Gregory. They chose Jones. When Gregory was there at 60 there's no way they were passing him up. Now Green vs a RB is a discussion, but I'd still err on the side of OL in the mid rounds over RB. Wilson in the 4th is another place to look, or Russell in the 5th. After our third round pick how many of the RBs picked would likely have made a major impact this year. Rawls should have been money whipped if we really wanted him, but IIRC we did allot a lot of our money in contracts, and maxed out Collins (wisely).

The running game isn't a problem, but its not the elite strength it was last year. Part of that is probably natural regression and a large part of that is lack of a credible, consistent passing threat. The whole offense has been backfiring all season.

 

[xwalker]

It is about moving the sticks. Getting ahead of third down. What you fail to acknowledge is that with Murray, they had a way to protect both the defense and the passing game by forcing eight in tyhje box and sometimes more.

This year the running game disappears in the second half. Granted, the team doesn't have Romo. And that is important. But the dirty yards are just not there. This was a cohesive team last year and the brain trust, and fans like you thought just anyone can step in and run the ball.

But there is a leadership factor you seem to never accept that Murray brought to the team.

He needed this team as much as they needed him. In the end both lost out. And your defense of your position doesn't change anything.

They allowed a play maker to walk because of money they could have positioned to pay. But elected not to because the brain trust believes, like you, that all things are the same. That anyone could do what Murray did.

And they relied on an immature guy who is no longer with the team, an undersized guy who is on IR, and a RB from Oakland that ios showing something, but not in the second half when it counts.

I disagree with your position, your stats, and the propaganda your signature posits as truth.

But other than that, you're an olkay guy with me. You still like the team.

I love when people disagree with simple stats. I didn't do anything to manipulate the stats.

You just disagree because of your emotional attachment to Murray and your emotional attachment to your opinion that when they didn't sign him that it was a mistake.

The running game didn't help last year when Weed had to start.

There is no way to compare this year to last year because Romo and Dez have been out.

 

[xwalker]

Murray was a good back who had a great season last year. Murray is a good back who's having a god awful season this year. I think the team pegged Murray as a good back, but not a special back. Not a Peterson type of player. And I think they've decided that second contracts for non elite RBs are a bad idea, which there's plenty of evidence to show with a little bit showing the other way. Despite this I'm pretty sure there's credible evidence that they made a decent offer to him. That offer was beaten by the Eagles, as I guess Chippy still thinks that he's in recruiting wars and he took a guy away from us for nothing. I don't touch that Eagles offer for him, because I just don't think he's likely to stay healthy and productive long term with his running style.

I think we'd all now agree that the problem is that having Joe Randle as the primary option going into the year was probably a bad idea. Not really because of his talent/play but because his head is weak. I think they wanted a RB in the draft. I think once Gurley was gone they weren't going to spend a 1st on a RB. So that decision was Jones vs Gregory. They chose Jones. When Gregory was there at 60 there's no way they were passing him up. Now Green vs a RB is a discussion, but I'd still err on the side of OL in the mid rounds over RB. Wilson in the 4th is another place to look, or Russell in the 5th. After our third round pick how many of the RBs picked would likely have made a major impact this year. Rawls should have been money whipped if we really wanted him, but IIRC we did allot a lot of our money in contracts, and maxed out Collins (wisely).

The running game isn't a problem, but its not the elite strength it was last year. Part of that is probably natural regression and a large part of that is lack of a credible, consistent passing threat. The whole offense has been backfiring all season.

The running game is 6th without having Romo and Dez to keep defenses from loading up against the run. It's hard to imagine the running game being better without Romo/Dez.

 

[CF74]

Exactly what I'm saying. McFadden's fumble is coming. You act like I said he has a fumble issue but I didn't. I'm just saying everyone fumbles every once and a while and it's been a while for McFadden so he's due.

Well let's just hope not..

 

[CowboyStar88]

Buck Allen was the guy I wanted in the third, but DMC would still have been better this year.

I like Buck

 

[JoeKing]

Well let's just hope not..

Yeah, let's wish the inevitable away.

 

[CF74]

Yeah, let's wish the inevitable away.

Everybody fumbles eventually and nobody is saying it won't ever happen so what exactly is your point?

 

[JoeKing]

Everybody fumbles eventually and nobody is saying it won't ever happen so what exactly is your point?

McFadden is due to fumble the ball. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Doesn't mean it will happen tonight.

 

[CF74]

McFadden is due to fumble the ball. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Doesn't mean it will happen tonight.

I get that, I even alluded to that, it's part of the game. Who is saying he may never fumble again around here? Are you saying since DMC is due for a fumble he shouldn't play now? What is your point?

 

[JoeKing]

I get that, I even alluded to that, it's part of the game. Who is saying he may never fumble again around here? Are you saying since DMC is due for a fumble he shouldn't play now? What is your point?

That's all I'm saying. Why do you have to make it be about anymore than that? Can't you just agree and let it go?

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

I liked Gurley, Coleman, Duke Johnson and Langford. Karlos Williams would have been nice in the 5th and really fits a need as a bigger back.

The only problem with the running game this year is not having Romo and Dez to make this a complete offense. It is amazing that we are where we are considering the QB play in regard to the running game.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Both Murray and Hardy of course.
It means we wouldn't have extended Crawford early. So it would have been a win win win situation.

Oh...you want it to be just black or white...sorry but this one has many shades of gray.

Clown shoes.

You're wearing them.

Wanting to pay an old RB big money?

So what? Best case we rise from 6th in rushing per carry to 1st? A difference of likely less than a half yard?

Dance.

 

[xwalker]

McFadden is due to fumble the ball. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Doesn't mean it will happen tonight.

According to your theory, a guy that fumbled twice last week is less likely than McFadden to fumble.

I guess a coach should never bench a QB with multiple INTs in a game or a RB with multiple fumbles because they are not "due" to have another one soon.

 

[JoeKing]

According to your theory, a guy that fumbled twice last week is less likely than McFadden to fumble.

I guess a coach should never bench a QB with multiple INTs in a game or a RB with multiple fumbles because they are not "due" to have another one soon.

Is that my theory? Show me where I said that. Seems to me you are just disagreeable just for the sake of being disagreeable. McFadden fumble is coming.