dallasdave
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 32,326
- Reaction score
- 88,063
Murray ran well when given the chance. Chance is the key word here, because he was not given much of one.
Should he still have gotten more carries? Absolutely. But JG didn't want to run the risk of 2nd and 12 every series.Those plays happen to every RB. Even Peterson got stopped for a loss a few times Sunday but no one would advocate that Minnesota stop giving him the ball.
This is the deal. This coaching staff is trying to stay in safe down/distance situations. Who can blame them? Negative runs put you in bad down/distance situations. So once negative runs start to pile up...they are the root of 3 and outs.....they abandon the run. Of course penalties also play a part in 3 and outs. But this team rarely recovers from negative runs. And with a fragile injured defense. Dallas is doing whatever it can to move the chains. Especially when those negative runs are the result of guys losing one on one battles. That sends signals to the coaching staff that we cannot outphysical the opponent. The loss of Brian Waters is huge!
You realize that Adrian Peterson had more negative runs than Murray did, right? 8-9 carries isn't even nearly enough sample size to draw your conclussions. They abandoned the run because they don't believe in it. Period.
Should he still have gotten more carries? Absolutely. But JG didn't want to run the risk of 2nd and 12 every series.
Murray stinks.
Yet I think largely because of Callahan's lame game plan/strategy.
You half to commit to the run and stay with it. With more runs, Murray gets in sync.
That is how it go.
Murray is not the problem, but with this game plan, he certainly becomes the fall guy.
You can't be the fall guy when you never get the ball. Absolutely no blame can go to the offensive line or the running backs.
Murray stinks.
Yet I think largely because of Callahan's lame game plan/strategy.
You half to commit to the run and stay with it. With more runs, Murray gets in sync.
That is how it go.
Murray is not the problem, but with this game plan, he certainly becomes the fall guy.
I humbly disagree with your description of the O line. They are not opening up the holes that Murray need and that might be the overall problem with the running game.
He was stopped twice in the backfield though, if I'm not mistaken.
Are we really going to compare Peterson to Murray. Furthermore, the Vikings have little else. Why would we constantly stare at 2nd and 12 when we have Romo, Dez, Witten, Williams etc. I wish we could run it better so we could run it more. But there are only so many possesions in a game...and fans, coaches, players etc...get frustrated when we are not getting first downs. Not only that...with this defense, we cannot afford too many 3 and outs. Even in our heyday of the 90s....we threw in the first half to get a lead. Then ran it in the 2nd to bleed the clock. We have to put points on the board and move those safeties out of the box to run it better. We do not have the horses up front to just line it up and blow people off the ball.You realize that Adrian Peterson had more negative runs than Murray did, right? 8-9 carries isn't even nearly enough sample size to draw your conclussions. They abandoned the run because they don't believe in it. Period.
wasn't his last attempt the failed third down where Romo tried to nudge the ball forward?
So 30 yards on his first handful of carries isn't convincing for you? Or the fact he is averaging over 5 yards a carry on the season? The holes are developing and Murray is finally learning how to run behind this scheme. The coaches are the problem.
Are we really going to compare Peterson to Murray. Furthermore, the Vikings have little else. Why would we constantly stare at 2nd and 12 when we have Romo, Dez, Witten, Williams etc. I wish we could run it better so we could run it more. But there are only so many possesions in a game...and fans, coaches, players etc...get frustrated when we are not getting first downs. Not only that...with this defense, we cannot afford too many 3 and outs. Even in our heyday of the 90s....we threw in the first half to get a lead. Then ran it in the 2nd to bleed the clock. We have to put points on the board and move those safeties out of the box to run it better. We do not have the horses up front to just line it up and blow people off the ball.