Darren Sproles

[Redball Express]

We have someone similar in Dunbar. If healthy id stay with him. Sproles isn't what he used to be. That's why saints are trading him

I'd take Sproles in a heartbeat.

No..hes not the same guy as 3 years ago..

..but he could probably get 1,000 yards+.behind our OL.

It all depends on how it really is with Garrett here.

If hes' on a short leash with the team..

..then I say yes for insurance as Garrett needs whomever they can afford to bring in to help.

But if Garrett is really more secure in his job and plans on being here past this season..

then no..

we don't need him.

 

[TonyRomo17]

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 1 min
The #Saints are cutting RB Darren Sproles, per source

 

[OhSnap]

I like Sproles but I'm scared of older millionaire players who already have a ring. Lets find someone a lil more hungry.

 

[OhSnap]

We throw screen passes once in a blue moon. So, what would be the point of having Sproles?

Murray has been creeping up in receiving every year catching 53 last year and thats with missing a couple games.

 

[mickswag]

He's about to be available.

 

[Chopzley]

I like Sproles but I'm scared of older millionaire players who already have a ring. Lets find someone a lil more hungry.

Sproles doesn't have a ring

 

[Aven8]

Sproles is a special player.

The Cowboys have never shown the ability to think outside of the box with a player like Sproles.

He needs a good coach for him to be as productive as he can be and he wouldn't find that here.

I agree with this. We could have 4 Megatrons, or Randy Moss' on our roster and we couldn't figure out how to use them. Hell, we've had Harris on the roster and still to the life of me cannot figure why this guy isn't our Sproles or Percy Harvin type player!
About the best thing I look forward to is seeing what Linehan does with this O. I'm hoping Jerry is right and that JG never attends an offensive meeting again.

 

[OhSnap]

Sproles doesn't have a ring

Yea I thought about Bush a few minutes later. Sproles fit so well with em seems like he's been there forever.

 

[big dog cowboy]

He seems to be the type of RB that is one step too slow for the NFL and he doesn't have the quickness when cutting to be good. I think that is the reason for the limited snaps. It seems like the coaches didn't consider him an option even when Murray was out.

The reason for his limited snaps are A) he was a rookie and B) we had the lowest number of rushing attempts in the NFL.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Sproles is a special player.

Who is a RB and on the wrong side of 30.

 

[joseephuss]

I'd take Sproles in a heartbeat.

No..hes not the same guy as 3 years ago..

..but he could probably get 1,000 yards+.behind our OL.

It all depends on how it really is with Garrett here.

If hes' on a short leash with the team..

..then I say yes for insurance as Garrett needs whomever they can afford to bring in to help.

But if Garrett is really more secure in his job and plans on being here past this season..

then no..

we don't need him.

Sproles has only gone over 1000 yards(rushing and receiving) once in his career and that was three seasons ago. There is no reason to believe he can do that again.

 

[EPL0c0]

We throw screen passes once in a blue moon. So, what would be the point of having Sproles?

I agree. Unforturnatley, a team that does throw screens often (and well) and has a system that can take advantage of Sproles is Philly. Shady/Sproles would be a helluva 1-2 punch.

 

[Redball Express]

Sproles has only gone over 1000 yards(rushing and receiving) once in his career and that was three seasons ago. There is no reason to believe he can do that again.

I think he could...

but its irrelevant anyway..

pretty sure we are set with Randlle, Dunbar, etc.

RB is not a problem for us right now.

Besides, we under use our backs badly anyway.

Sproles probably wouldn't get many carries.

 

[Szczepanik]

The term on the wrong side of 30 is so overused by our fanbase it is disgusting. If the man keeps in good shape and diets well than he increases his shelf life regardless.

He has been great as a scatback. He is a very skilled niche players who is hard as heck to defend against. Always has been.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Backup RB isn't nearly as big of a priority as anyone on defense. All FA money need to go on that side of the ball. Besides, we just drafted a RB last April.

It was a 5th rounder and Randle didn't look particularly athletic out there to me. With Murray expiring and Dunbar of the Matt Johnson mold, I don't think it's too soon to look for RB. Not that Sproles is the answer.

I agree that DT is a higher priority but we have Ware, Selvie and Crawford at DE; Lee, Holloman, Wilber, Carter and Durant at LB; Church, Wilcox, Heath and Johnson at S.

Are Murray, Randle and Dunbar better depth this year and going forward than any of the others?

 

[respectdatstar]

He could be an asset as RB depth and return man. Would anybody consider Devin Hester to take over on returns? We could use him like Julian Edelman. WR/KR/PR/CB. He played CB at Miami (FL), right?

 

[Section446]

Guy will be 31 at the start of the season, the idea is to get younger, pass.

 

[joseephuss]

I think he could...

but its irrelevant anyway..

pretty sure we are set with Randlle, Dunbar, etc.

RB is not a problem for us right now.

Besides, we under use our backs badly anyway.

Sproles probably wouldn't get many carries.

Sproles has never gotten many carries. He has 437 career rushing attempts since joining the league in 2005.

And I'm failing to see your logic. If you think Dallas under utilizes their backs then how would he be able to gain over a 1000 yards. He was in a great system in New Orleans and failed to get to 1000 yards the last two seasons.

 

[Section446]

Sproles has never gotten many carries. He has 437 career rushing attempts since joining the league in 2005.

And I'm failing to see your logic. If you think Dallas under utilizes their backs then how would he be able to gain over a 1000 yards. He was in a great system in New Orleans and failed to get to 1000 yards the last two seasons.

Maybe he means 1,000 yards receiving?

 

[joseephuss]

The term on the wrong side of 30 is so overused by our fanbase it is disgusting. If the man keeps in good shape and diets well than he increases his shelf life regardless.

He has been great as a scatback. He is a very skilled niche players who is hard as heck to defend against. Always has been.

It isn't disgusting even if it is overused. If anything the term truly applies to the running back position. The concern with Sproles should be that his production has greatly reduced each of the last two seasons. He had a record 2696 all-purpose yards(rushing, receiving, kick and pun return yards) in 2011. In 2012 he had 1577 yards and last season he had 1273 yards. That isn't a good trend.