Demarco Murray.....LOL

[CowboyRoy]

I have not seen any other threads about this today so I will get the ball rolling....

Im not sure what I enjoyed more, watching the Eagles lose or watching Demarco Muddy get stuffed all night long.
2 gimmie goal line TD's is all that saved what was one of the most pathetic showings I have ever seen.

9 million or 8 million per year for 5 years for a bloated goal line back. Too funny.

Its not quite there yet, but its pretty hilarious that we can almost put this line vs the back thing to bed after one week.

Cowboys RB's by committee is out to a huge lead. Heck we might want to track Randle vs Murray at this point.

During crunch time, Murray was riding the pine. I still maintain that when healthy, Ryan Mathews is a better back than Demarco Muddy.

Without monster holes Muddy is JAG.

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

I've thought as soon as Mathews signed there that he was the eventual lead back. Murray just doesn't fit the running scheme there very well. He does however fit the what they like to do catching the ball out of the backfield, but Sproles does that awfully well...

 

[Seven]

He's an Eagle now.

I don't care until we play them.

 

[ShiningStar]

I dont know, Murray scored and once he was banging up the defense, Matthews seemed to open up. I think it was silly of Chip to let Bradford throw when his rbs were beating up the Falcons. Thats not on Murray.

 

[mattjames2010]

People need to start watching the games instead of just looking at the stat line. They are using Murray and Mathews poorly.

When healthy, Mathews is a better back?

Mathews - 3 attempts, 4 yards. 3 receptions, 24 yards.

Murray could have had about 12 receptions in this game with good yards but Bradford forced balls to receivers. This offense needs to play to Murray and Mathews strengths.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I dont know, Murray scored and once he was banging up the defense, Matthews seemed to open up. I think it was silly of Chip to let Bradford throw when his rbs were beating up the Falcons. Thats not on Murray.

Murray had 9 carries for 11 yards. He was not only ineffective, but the Oline was NOT blowing up holes like the Cowboys line. The only running plays that worked for them most of the night were the sweeps. And guys like Sproles are better at them because they are quicker to the outside.

 

[CowboyRoy]

People need to start watching the games instead of just looking at the stat line. They are using Murray and Mathews poorly.

When healthy, Mathews is a better back?

Mathews - 3 attempts, 4 yards. 3 receptions, 24 yards.

Murray could have had about 12 receptions in this game with good yards but Bradford forced balls to receivers. This offense needs to play to Murray and Mathews strengths.

The Oline just isnt as good. No holes for Murray to jog through. Mathews is quicker and better in the passing game. I watched the game.

 

[mattjames2010]

The Oline just isnt as good. No holes for Murray to jog through. Mathews is quicker and better in the passing game. I watched the game.

You haven't seen enough of Mathews. Chargers utilize RBs in the passing game more often than I can think of with any other team. His high was 50 receptions, all the way back in 2011. He played 16 games in 2013, had 26 receptions. They preferred Woodhead in the passing game.

Mathews is a good option to have, but he's not the receiver Murray is.

 

[CowboyRoy]

You haven't seen enough of Mathews. Chargers utilize RBs in the passing game more often than I can think of with any other team. His high was 50 receptions, all the way back in 2011. He played 16 games in 2013, had 26 receptions. They preferred Woodhead in the passing game.

Mathews is a good option to have, but he's not the receiver Murray is.

I have watched Mathews for many years and Demarco for many. When healthy, my opinion is that Mathews is a better running back. Faster, quicker, better burst, better through the hole, and better in the passing game.

 

[BAZ]

He's an Eagle now.

I don't care until we play them.

Which is this week so you care right now, correct?

 

[JD_KaPow]

I dont know, Murray scored and once he was banging up the defense, Matthews seemed to open up. I think it was silly of Chip to let Bradford throw when his rbs were beating up the Falcons. Thats not on Murray.

On the drive where they missed the FG, they ran Mathews (one 't') on 2nd and 4 (3 yard gain) and again on 3rd and 1 for no gain. Then they missed the long FG. This was with 3 minutes left and the FG would only put them up by one, so they clearly wanted that first down.

So they did run it late, they ran it with Mathews late, and it didn't work. And those were two of his three runs in the game, so I'm not sure what you mean about how "Mathews seemed to open up."

 

[Jenky]

People need to start watching the games instead of just looking at the stat line. They are using Murray and Mathews poorly.

When healthy, Mathews is a better back?

Mathews - 3 attempts, 4 yards. 3 receptions, 24 yards.

Murray could have had about 12 receptions in this game with good yards but Bradford forced balls to receivers. This offense needs to play to Murray and Mathews strengths.

Agreed. DeMarco is going to be a waste for them.

 

[guag]

It's only the first game, so I don't see how we can draw any real conclusions yet in any regard.

However, I will say that last night might not have been the best opportunity for Murray given the hole the Eagles were in at half time. Bradford had over 50 attempts in the game, so running the ball obviously wasn't a priority.

Then again, you can only be judged on the opportunities that you're given, and averaging around 1 yard per carry isn't good no matter how you slice it... even though it might have been more on the offensive line than on Murray himself.

Anyway, can't wait for this week's game. I honestly don't give a damn how well Murray does, as long as we win.

 

[JD_KaPow]

People need to start watching the games instead of just looking at the stat line. They are using Murray and Mathews poorly.

When healthy, Mathews is a better back?

Mathews - 3 attempts, 4 yards. 3 receptions, 24 yards.

Didn't you just say we shouldn't be "just looking at the stat line?"

Murray could have had about 12 receptions in this game with good yards but Bradford forced balls to receivers. This offense needs to play to Murray and Mathews strengths.

In what world is using him as a receiver "playing to Murray's strengths?" Especially when they have Sproles on the roster? Murray's an okay receiver, but he's no Sproles, and it's certainly not his strength. I don't doubt that they're using Murray poorly, but I don't think they're equipped to use him well: his strengths don't match their system or personnel. We'll see how things progress.

 

[guag]

In what world is using him as a receiver "playing to Murray's strengths?" Especially when they have Sproles on the roster? Murray's an okay receiver, but he's no Sproles, and it's certainly not his strength. I don't doubt that they're using Murray poorly, but I don't think they're equipped to use him well: his strengths don't match their system or personnel. We'll see how things progress.

It really boggles my mind as to why the Eagles felt it necessary to spend the kind of money they did for Murray's services. I would completely understand if Murray was a great fit for their system and was set to be their workhorse back... but with 2 other capable guys on the roster in Matthews and Sproles, he's going to be sharing time with them. If he's going to be getting maybe 10-15 touches per game (runs & receptions), $8-9 million a year is a ridiculous waste of resources.

 

[mattjames2010]

Didn't you just say we shouldn't be "just looking at the stat line?"
In what world is using him as a receiver "playing to Murray's strengths?" Especially when they have Sproles on the roster? Murray's an okay receiver, but he's no Sproles, and it's certainly not his strength. I don't doubt that they're using Murray poorly, but I don't think they're equipped to use him well: his strengths don't match their system or personnel. We'll see how things progress.

Murray is better than just an "okay" receiver. It IS a strength. He had over 100 receptions in 2013 and 2014. And I never said he is better than Sproles, I'm saying to completely ignore him in the passing game is dumb, when he can make plays happen when receiving.

You can still get Murray involved in the passing game while keeping Sproles receptions high. Murray was in on many of the passing plays, a lot that failed, while Bradford forced the ball to blanketed WRs. A dump off to Murray on a few of those plays were an easy first down.

And Mathews stat line is to counter using Murray's stat line against him. To laugh at Murray for his performance last night and then tout Mathew's, they both had similar nights.

 

[Seven]

Which is this week so you care right now, correct?

Seriously?

Sunday, dude.............for about three hours.

Oh yeah. "Care" is relative. Just so we're clear.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Murray is better than just an "okay" receiver. It IS a strength. He had over 100 receptions in 2013 and 2014. And I never said he is better than Sproles, I'm saying to completely ignore him in the passing game is dumb, when he can make plays happen when receiving.

You can still get Murray involved in the passing game while keeping Sproles receptions high. Murray was in on many of the passing plays, a lot that failed, while Bradford forced the ball to blanketed WRs. A dump off to Murray on a few of those plays were an easy first down.

And Mathews stat line is to counter using Murray's stat line against him. To laugh at Murray for his performance last night and then tout Mathew's, they both had similar nights.

I'm with you on Mathews vs. Murray last night.

But now, receiving is not a strength of Murray's. It's a complementary skill of his. He's a perfectly fine receiver, but not one of the better receiving backs in the league. He had all those receptions partly because he was always on the field. But his 7.3 yards per catch did not compare well with RBs where receiving really is a strength.

 

[BAZ]

Seriously?

Sunday, dude.............for about three hours.

Oh yeah. "Care" is relative. Just so we're clear.

Why even click this thread with such a weird mentality. Why even read the nfl zone? Seriously Murray should be on all fans minds this week because he will most likely be running pissed off after his shitshow Sunday.

 

[mattjames2010]

I'm with you on Mathews vs. Murray last night.

But now, receiving is not a strength of Murray's. It's a complementary skill of his. He's a perfectly fine receiver, but not one of the better receiving backs in the league. He had all those receptions partly because he was always on the field. But his 7.3 yards per catch did not compare well with RBs where receiving really is a strength.

You're using the word "strength" here incorrectly. If it's not a strength, you're saying it's a weakness. It brings positives to his game, so it's a strength.

No one is arguing his receiving is on the level of Forte or Sproles. He'll be in on enough passing downs this year and should be an option in the passing game.