Cowboys sign Darren McFadden - 2yr deal worth up to $5.85m (200k bonus)

[bodi]

He's a progress stopper for Randle, Dunbar, and a potential draft pick.

FOR WHO ? RANDLE AN DUNBAR BOTH MAY AS WELL PACK OT UP

RANDLE WON'T MAKE THE TEAM

DUNBAR A CHANGE OF PACE BACK DON'T KNOW WHY THO IMO - HE IS PRETTY POOR

a ROOKIE an DMAC I can live with that

 

[jterrell]

He's a progress stopper for Randle, Dunbar, and a potential draft pick.

Dunbar isn't here, Randle is awaiting possible suspension and we haven't drafted anyone yet.
Sow hat progress has he stopped exactly?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

How much different was the scouting report on Murray prior to last year?

Murray was special last year but he has 1 special year ot his career.
Just happens to be a career year in a contract year and behind the best OL in football.

You think McFadden has been running behind the Dallas OL or with Romo at QB and Dez at WR?

Murray is a bit better back than McFadden but he is not 20m guaranteed better, I promise you that.

He might not be 20 million better...but he is a heck of a lot better than mcfadden and the stats prove that even with Murray's injury history.

However my objection has nothing to do with Murray. It has to deal with signing a RB that has been nothing but injury and when healthy has not been a factor in the pros and has been around the league long enough to have proven or not proven his worth.

I understand he is cheap, I understand he might not be on the roster come opening day, I understand if he is on the roster on starting day chances are he is a platoon back.

I just think it is a bad signing and a waste of time.

 

[Kaiser]

He's a progress stopper for Randle, Dunbar, and a potential draft pick.

If he is blocking progress from a better player he will be cut. And Dunbar is never going to be a rotation guy, he will always be a specialty back at best. IMO his spot on the team isn't guaranteed and I have no problem with more competition at the RB spot right now.

 

[Stash]

What he is, at this point, is a camp body. If he proves to be more than that, great. If not, no harm no foul, given the $200K signing bonus. C'mon Stash. You really worried that McFadden keeps us from bringing in Ridley as a camp body?

I definitely do. There's already too many question marks at running back right now, I think McFadden only adds to the questions. And do you foresee them adding yet another back? At least I saw some possible upside with Ridley.

Spiller's in a different class, but he would cost more, without providing much comfort that the hole at RB was adequately addressed.

Sure he would have, but nothing compared to what they were prepared to pay Murray, and likely less than the $4 million the Saints paid for Ingram. And speaking for myself, I would have been more comfortable with Spiller than this signing.

I honestly see it as a waste of time on a guy who will likely never have a regular season carry for this team. The damage comes from the team thinking they've accomplished anything in terms of filling their need.

 

[jterrell]

And how mant full seasons - out of 7 - has your 'Iron Man' completed?




Not everything, just the stupid ones, like this one. I freely give praise where it's due. The difference is that I am also able to criticize when warranted rather than mindlessly praise everything like it's my obligation.



When? 5 years ago? When was the last year he had over a measly 4 yards a carry?

He's completed the same number of full seasons as Demarco Murray. 1, and both were last year.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Good value Jerra!
but maybe not so mush when the defenses start keying in more on our receivers and Mac F turns in a 600-yard season.

Why you ax?

The following from yahoo sports concern me:

In 2014, McFadden ran for 534 yards and two touchdowns on 3.4 yards per carry while also catching 36 passes for 212 yards while appearing in all 16 games. It was the first time in McFadden’s seven-year career in Oakland that he managed to play in all 16 games.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Is Randle the starter then?

LOL

ok i laughed. Now you half me depressed.

 

[jterrell]

He might not be 20 million better...but he is a heck of a lot better than mcfadden and the stats prove that even with Murray's injury history.

However my objection has nothing to do with Murray. It has to deal with signing a RB that has been nothing but injury and when healthy has not been a factor in the pros and has been around the league long enough to have proven or not proven his worth.

I understand he is cheap, I understand he might not be on the roster come opening day, I understand if he is on the roster on starting day chances are he is a platoon back.

I just think it is a bad signing and a waste of time.

the role here for McFadden is probably as a platoon back and kick off return guy.
dallas had to sign a RB of some sort because you need bodies and injury protection.

i think mcfadden will be better here than anyone expects and i think his oakland time devalued him tremendously.

we have the ol and overall offense to provide any back with running lanes.
mcfadden brings ball security and blocking acumen, the exact areas you'd fear a rookie back in.

 

[IAmLegend]

Can't believe it's been 7 years since McFadden was drafted out of Arkansas.. Man I'm getting old.

 

[Gameover]

The Cowboys OL is not the best in football.. Potentail to be? Yep!

 

[Smith22]

the role here for McFadden is probably as a platoon back and kick off return guy.
dallas had to sign a RB of some sort because you need bodies and injury protection.

i think mcfadden will be better here than anyone expects and i think his oakland time devalued him tremendously.

we have the ol and overall offense to provide any back with running lanes.
mcfadden brings ball security and blocking acumen, the exact areas you'd fear a rookie back in.

A voice of reason. Thank you.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

the role here for McFadden is probably as a platoon back and kick off return guy.
dallas had to sign a RB of some sort because you need bodies and injury protection.

i think mcfadden will be better here than anyone expects and i think his oakland time devalued him tremendously.

we have the ol and overall offense to provide any back with running lanes.
mcfadden brings ball security and blocking acumen, the exact areas you'd fear a rookie back in.

You could be right...I just don't see it.

 

[jterrell]

The Cowboys OL is not the best in football.. Potentail to be? Yep!

whose better?

 

[Arkyvarminter]

I have to put my two cents on this one since he is a former Razorback. First, coming out of college, McFadden was a much better back than Murray. Today, he probably isn't but he's a lot faster. Second, anyone who thinks a healthy D Mack isn't better than Randall is kidding themselves. Can't wait till preseason..........

 

[davey999]

whose better?

I think they are the best but they did struggle in a few games...

 

[TX_Yid]

I don't like it much right now, but I'll reserve judgement until I see what he can do behind our line.

 

[jterrell]

You could be right...I just don't see it.

none of brinkley, mcfadden, rivers or the fullback excite me.
but it is very sound roster building
we are filling it from the bottom up and doing so with no cap outlay.

2 months from now everyone else will be trying to fill their final 5-7 roster spots and there won;t be legit pros to do so.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

He might not be 20 million better...but he is a heck of a lot better than mcfadden and the stats prove that even with Murray's injury history.

However my objection has nothing to do with Murray. It has to deal with signing a RB that has been nothing but injury and when healthy has not been a factor in the pros and has been around the league long enough to have proven or not proven his worth.

I understand he is cheap, I understand he might not be on the roster come opening day, I understand if he is on the roster on starting day chances are he is a platoon back.

I just think it is a bad signing and a waste of time.

The guy costs 200k. And you think it's a bad signing?

Good grief.

 

[Stash]

I don't think that's quite fair. McFadden wasn't bad his first year, and was very good in 2010 and 2011, averaging more than 5 yards per carry. He's been a hunk of junk the past three seasons, which probably is an indication that his injuries have taken their toll.

I expect nothing from him at this point in his career, but he did show ability before heading downhill permanently after his fourth season. Of course, we're paying virtually nothing to take this look, so as long as that's all it is, and not a supposed answer to losing Murray, I'm OK with that. The signing doesn't prohibit us from going after any other running back we want.

It certainly doesn't financially, but my fear is that they think they're in any way finished looking. My belief is that this takes them out of any possibility for either Spiller or Ridley, either of whom I would prefer to this move.