Critic's review of running game

[remdak]

He should he had more carries. But he didn't show much.

He had better yards per carry than both Murray and Peterson as well. Look, I am not here to say Randle is all world, but he wasn't terrible either.

 

[darthseinfeld]

I expect randle to be 3rd on the depth chart by seasons end. He can't be a lead back in this committee or anywhere else in the league. Get McFadden in the game. He's clearly better than JR.

I think Michael/McFadden/Dunbar is a winning combo. Randle to me looks like a spread offense back. He looks like a back that can do some damage in a 4 WR set with the defense spread out. He has solid vision and cutting ability to gash teams in that type of offense but I dont think he has the speed, power and balance to be more then a backup in a more traditional running game

 

[Roadtrip635]

One thing I think can be successful with our RB's is to use them similar to how the Saints used Pierre Thomas and Sproles. A lot of short passes, wheel routes and screens to the RB's, get them in space. The Saints RB's were getting 70-90 catches/season. Spreading the field side to side on those type passes can open up more draws and delayed handoffs.

 

[Zekeats]

I expect randle to be 3rd on the depth chart by seasons end. He can't be a lead back in this committee or anywhere else in the league. Get McFadden in the game. He's clearly better than JR.

He is not that much better. If he doesn't have a big hole to run through then he had nothing, He is not shifty at all which is why he did nothing in 7 years with the raiders. It's easy for people to say he just needs to stay healthy but the facts are he just isn't as good as people make him out to be. C-Mike will eventually win the starting gig and randle will back him and eventually McFadden will most likely get cut

 

[blindzebra]

Stop analyzing the RBs, the key to the running game is the OL and that was the first time the 5 played together since last DECEMBER.

 

[xwalker]

I sincerely wonder how many people knocking Randle's play went back and look at the tape.

It's ironic I made a whole thread dedicated to film study of just Randle's runs, and all the people knocking Randle just choose to ignore it.

I know the feeling.

Most people see what they want to see. If they didn't like Randle before the game then they'll only see the negative issues even if it is only 1 play that they remember.

 

[lostar2009]

He had better yards per carry than both Murray and Peterson as well. Look, I am not here to say Randle is all world, but he wasn't terrible either.

His runs wasn't impressive. I think DMAC could had better sucess if given the same reps.q

 

[Zman5]

Keep in mind that Dez missed most of the game which makes it harder to run if you're comparing to what Murray did last year. Obviously, they'll have the same problem in upcoming games.

That's probably true but what I was concerned about was how easily Randle went down after initial contact. He is very good when there is room to wiggle but he seems to have problems in small spaces and he gets tackled easily.

I mentioned this few months back when someone posted a video of all the Randle's run last year. Few posters jump on me for it but it looks like Randle still has problem breaking tackles.

 

[texbumthelife]

I know the feeling.

Most people see what they want to see. If they didn't like Randle before the game then they'll only see the negative issues even if it is only 1 play that they remember.

It's uncanny and they all just start retelling the same erroneous information like lost lemmings.

 

[xwalker]

It's uncanny and they all just start retelling the same erroneous information like lost lemmings.

There was a game last year where people claimed Wilcox was terrible and should be cut. On review he literally had 1 bad play. It just happened to one that was obvious and the announcer made a big deal about it.

I call it confirmation bias. People see whatever confirms their bias.

 

[texbumthelife]

There was a game last year where people claimed Wilcox was terrible and should be cut. On review he literally had 1 bad play. It just happened to one that was obvious and the announcer made a big deal about it.

I call it confirmation bias. People see whatever confirms their bias.

Well, we've gone toe to toe about Wilcox, so I'll avoid that, haha. I agree.

 

[gimmesix]

wait...What does everyone think about how Murray looked last night against ATL?

Doesn't matter. He doesn't live here anymore.

 

[xwalker]

Well, we've gone toe to toe about Wilcox, so I'll avoid that, haha. I agree.

We did? I just remember 1 poster specifically on that subject (Latinmind).

 

[texbumthelife]

We did? I just remember 1 poster specifically on that subject (Latinmind).

It may not have been last season. It may have been the season before. I have been very hard on Wilcox though, admittedly. I would love nothing more than for him to prove me wrong though, make no mistake.

 

[CCBoy]

Anyone who has read my posts about the running game knows I was not satisfied with what Dallas did to replace last year's offensive player of the year. So I approached our first game with skepticism about our ability to establish the run and was left a little dissatisfied on initial review by the running efforts. I've since gone back and watched the first half (so far) more closely, and was a little happier about what I saw.

My barometer for an effective running game is how the backs do on first down. My reason for this is that I believe if you can have success running the ball when teams expect you to run it then the opponent has to devote more resources to stopping the run, which opens things up for the passing game.

I initially thought the early returns were not good on first down, but Randle broke a 15-yard run on Dallas' fourth first down (after runs of 2 and 3 and a 5-yard pass on the previous three first downs) on the initial drive.

In the second quarter, Dallas also got an 8-yard first-down run by McFadden.

Now, let me say that there were a lot more 2- and 3-yarders than 5-plus-yarders, but what Dallas had to show to make the run-threat legitimate is the threat of those longer runs, so it established that. The Cowboys also very effectively made the backs a part of the passing game (finally using Dunbar the way everyone's been expecting them to for years).

It wasn't a perfect effort. We didn't show that we can pound the ball/exert our will in the running game, but turnovers didn't exactly put us in position to do that. So the jury remains out on whether we can run it at will. BUT the fact that we showed some semblance of ability to run on first down is a good start.

Darren McFadden, Lance Dunbar, Cole Beasley, and Gavin Escobar will help a lot in keeping honest the Philadelphia defense. The Eagles will have to pay for too many blitzes and attacking stunts.

Make them pay on a few aggressive plays, and Tony Romo should have a game back in his own hands.

 

[CCBoy]

Don't forget, that Philadelphia under utilized DeMarco Murray this past week. And they do a lot of fast action and opposite side of the field type of scheme decisions as well...

 

[gimmesix]

His runs wasn't impressive. I think DMAC could had better sucess if given the same reps.q

Possibly. But outside of the 8-yard burst, McFadden's runs were much less impressive. I don't feel like we got everything we needed to establish the running game from either, but Randle did more in that regard in this game. Yes, he had some runs for 2 yards and less, but he did slither for some 5-plus-yarders to ultimately average 4.1.

McFadden made an impression on his first run, then a bunch of nothing on his other five. If it hadn't been for his 19-yard catch where he showed off his speed, we'd have little else to talk about than the 8-yarder.

As I said, we didn't show with either that we can exert our will in the run game, but the way the game played out might have had more to do with that than the ability to just run over teams. We'll see.

 

[xwalker]

It may not have been last season. It may have been the season before. I have been very hard on Wilcox though, admittedly. I would love nothing more than for him to prove me wrong though, make no mistake.

I don't have a problem with people calling out a player if they did screw up, but Safety is one area where fans often don't see it correctly. This is especially true for people that don't review the All-22.

A Safety can appear to be completely out of position if you don't consider what he is expecting from his surrounding teammates. Last season Wilcox got screwed several times by players like Bruce Carter when they didn't play within the "rules" of the scheme.

 

[foofighters]

Doesn't matter. He doesn't live here anymore.

Actually it is very relevant and does matter. You can't talk about the running game and only pick from what sample you want to chose from. He didn't look comfortable while our backs looked comfortable. Although we had at least 20 running attempts, we passed quite a bit more. If anything, this anomaly is due to our turnovers. So if you want to just cherry pick your stats/views to only make your point, you're no better than the stuff being spewed from bspn. Nice try but next time, take the entire view. A larger sample size would be better as well but I understand the need to doom and gloom after one game.

 

[gimmesix]

Actually it is very relevant and does matter. You can't talk about the running game and only pick from what sample you want to chose from. He didn't look comfortable while our backs looked comfortable. Although we had at least 20 running attempts, we passed quite a bit more. If anything, this anomaly is due to our turnovers. So if you want to just cherry pick your stats/views to only make your point, you're no better than the stuff being spewed from bspn. Nice try but next time, take the entire view. A larger sample size would be better as well but I understand the need to doom and gloom after one game.

No, it's irrelevant. What Murray does for the Eagles has no bearing on what Randle/McFadden/Dunbar does for the Cowboys.

Let's concentrate on the guys we've got and what they do. We don't need to view Murray's performance for another team to evaluate the players we have.

The only value that has is to placate us: Well, our backs did better than Murray. When the real question is did our backs do good enough for Dallas. The answer to that this week is what I wrote about in the OP.