Twitter: Demarco Murray media rounds - DP Show and The Fan - 01/29/15

[Dhragon]

Not sure why people thought Peterson would A) get released and B) waltz in here and want to play for a reduced rate. Just not going to happen. He will want more money than Murray and I don't want to pay Murray more than $4M per.

A) Because he now has a lot of off-the-field baggage and is no longer the darling and face of the NFL - and he is the highest paid RB in the NFL ( I believe ). He will no longer be a draw for Minny fans - more likely a deterrent.

B) Regardless of how good he has been in the past - he is 30 and now has baggage. That will take off $$$ from whatever next contract he will get. Here or elsewhere.

 

[DFWJC]

Hu?

I'm sure he's referring to net salary cap impact

 

[Idgit]

I'm not comparing him to Emmitt. I'm just saying he's the best to come along since Emmitt. Like you I don't care about the yards so much. I care about the threat of the yards. My biggest reason for wanting him to stay is Romos health. I don't want to put that in the hands of a rook just to save a few bucks when Romo is all we have at QB. His window is closing fast.

That's what I worry about. Especially in pass protection, if that's what you specifically mean (as opposed to just running the ball more).

Honestly, for me, though, I'd take 400 fewer yards if I could eliminate the unnecessary fumbles in the running game. Not just for Murray, too, as Randle had a couple careless drops of his own. I love seeing the big runs as much as the next fun, because they're so alpha, but, really, our offense will win it's match ups if we just evaluate players well and trust it to work. But we've got to hang onto the ball better and then spend whatever we can to address the lack of a pass rush. Those things are more important than rushing yardage from a lead back.

 

[slick325]

Quote="DBOY3141, post: 5962351, member: 2553"]I see them as a player as well, but they also have to get a long term deal done with Luck and Hilton. Lot of cap money eaten up between those two.[/quote]

True...but I'm sure they would invest in order to have a version of the Triplets. Or a version of Manning/Harrison/Wayne and James.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

A) Because he now has a lot of off-the-field baggage and is no longer the darling and face of the NFL - and he is the highest paid RB in the NFL ( I believe ). He will no longer be a draw for Minny fans - more likely a deterrent.

B) Regardless of how good he has been in the past - he is 30 and now has baggage. That will take off $$$ from whatever next contract he will get. Here or elsewhere.

The 90s Cowboys carried way more baggage than AP. They were still loved by the fans and were still paid well because they were still top players.
I don't see it any different for AP. The fans there feel the same about their star players as fans any where. The coaches still want AP there.
Every one might be surprised to see he stays put.

 

[Doomsday101]

The 90s Cowboys carried way more baggage than AP. They were still loved by the fans and were still paid well because they were still top players.
I don't see it any different for AP. The fans there feel the same about their star players as fans any where. The coaches still want AP there.
Every one might be surprised to see he stays put.

True, I don't see AP walking away from 12 mill and fact that the Vikes can carry that contract and still remain below the cap by around 11 mill comes down to one simple thing do they want him to remain with the vikes. Zimmer indicates he does want him to remain and why not it would take a lot of pressure off a young QB in Bridgewater.

 

[Stash]

You may be right, the fact that they are working on a deal at this point leads me to think Dallas will make an offer before March 10th we will see.

And don't get me wrong, I hope you're right about it!

 

[visionary]

Man, it's weird for me on DM. There's probably not an attitude I like better on the team. *Maybe* Witten or Romo. The guy just wants to work, and he wants to win. And yet, I don't want to resign him because I think the odds say he's going to diminish and diminish quickly. Even at the $4-4.5M/year level, I'm lukewarm. At the same time, I really really like everything I ever hear out of the guy's mouth. And he walks the walk, too. Throw in the MMA stuff, and you know he's a bonafide badass. I feel guilting hoping the guy moves on.

Agreed

History argues against resigning him and I really believe that AP is all but in the bag but I really like DMs attitude and work ethic

Though every time I hear someone say "it's not about the money " I know they're not being truthful

 

[big dog cowboy]

A) Because he now has a lot of off-the-field baggage and is no longer the darling and face of the NFL - and he is the highest paid RB in the NFL ( I believe ). He will no longer be a draw for Minny fans - more likely a deterrent.

B) Regardless of how good he has been in the past - he is 30 and now has baggage. That will take off $$$ from whatever next contract he will get. Here or elsewhere.

You are over state the value of his baggage. If Minnesota decides to move from Peterson, his new team will be thrill to have him and the fan base will be energized. Once the games begin and the big rushes and TD's come everything will be but a distant memory. While he is the highest paid RB in the league, he will still command a bigger price on the FA market than the Cowboys should pay.

 

[Idgit]

Agreed

History argues against resigning him and I really believe that AP is all but in the bag but I really like DMs attitude and work ethic

Though every time I hear someone say "it's not about the money " I know they're not being truthful

I'm reading that as 'I want to play for a contender, first. Then I want the most money I can get.' Of course, if there's a huge gap between what contenders will pay him and what another team will pay him, that could change. But DM's pretty straight up. I do think he think he means it, at least.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

You said you'd rather pay Adrian Peterson. Which is it?

It doesn't have to be black or white.

Given the choice.... Give me AD.

he is a transcendent talent.

Murray is not.

 

[Broges74]

Whoooa.. I've always been on the side of Peterson coming here but if DeMarco is willing to take a discount to stay here, I'm all for that.

 

[locked&loaded]

This is probably where I differ from most who want Murray back. I'm ok with a committee approach at the position if it means spending more on defense.

And I'm not ok betting a guy is going to beat an actuary table at his position. Sign big future deals based off of what you know typically happens. Don't do it based off of the fact that you like the guy and he had a career year. We massively overpaid for Barber, and knew it at the time, but it was an easy honey-pot of a trap when you looked at how good the guy was the season heading into the negotiations. Those feel-goods can change in a hurry, though. And if you've seen the guy tail off-and Murray did--at the end of the career season already, you gotta be really careful with your expectations going forward. I just don't like the risk.

He had a plate and screws in his hand and still had over 100 yards and 5ypc at GB and the Skins. Not exactly tailing off, he just had a rough game against the eagles (where he broke his hand, and the colts the first game back from breaking his hand...GIve the guy a freaking break!) I know its kind of stupid to say, but if he didn't fumble that ball at GB and ran for what could have been 50+ we wouldn't have been talking about a 'slow down'.

Also, in Barbers best season he barely had half the yards Murray totaled this year...

I dislike the committee approach. It seemed like it was going to be a thing, but the idea has fallen off considerably because teams really haven't had success with it besides the Patriots; and nobody would say the Pats had as good of a ground game as the Cowboys did this year. It just doesn't allow the line and rb to mesh, and screws with the offenses cohesiveness.

I am fine with tempering my expectations, and I don't want to pay any running back 7,8, 9 million. But I think an incentive laden contract can only benefit both sides, and if Murray is willing to give a team/super bowl run discount, I am willing to run with him.

 

[casmith07]

Given the choice.... Give me AD.

he is a transcendent talent.

Murray is not.

Age.

 

[Idgit]

He had a plate and screws in his hand and still had over 100 yards and 5ypc at GB and the Skins. Not exactly tailing off, he just had a rough game against the eagles (where he broke his hand, and the colts the first game back from breaking his hand...GIve the guy a freaking break!) I know its kind of stupid to say, but if he didn't fumble that ball at GB and ran for what could have been 50+ we wouldn't have been talking about a 'slow down'.

Also, in Barbers best season he barely had half the yards Murray totaled this year...

I dislike the committee approach. It seemed like it was going to be a thing, but the idea has fallen off considerably because teams really haven't had success with it besides the Patriots; and nobody would say the Pats had as good of a ground game as the Cowboys did this year. It just doesn't allow the line and rb to mesh, and screws with the offenses cohesiveness.

I am fine with tempering my expectations, and I don't want to pay any running back 7,8, 9 million. But I think an incentive laden contract can only benefit both sides, and if Murray is willing to give a team/super bowl run discount, I am willing to run with him.

Well, I can agree with you that, had he not fumbled in GB and had instead run for another 40 yards there, plus whatever else he might have done on that drive, we wouldn't be talking much about any slow down in the running game.

I don't mind the slow down, as it was, though. The offense actually became more effective during that stretch. My comment was more that it looked like his effectiveness dipped there at the end of the season. And for a guy with injury history, that fact that it dipped because of him besting through an injury is kind of part of the point. Nobody's disputing his tough-guy status. Just that RBs get knicked. If they get a lot of carries in the season, they tend to wear down naturally, and that it's a young man's position unless, as you suggest, you're getting a discount on that second contract. But, if I'm Murray, I'm probably not expecting to have to give anybody a discount.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Age.

What's your window of contention?

If it's 2 or 3 years what do you care?

And why don't we pay age? Generally speaking?

Well older players are less effective and more injury prone.

Murray is.... Today.... Less effective than Peterson AND more injury prone.

Why again would we want him over All Day?

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

I still hold out hope that they can work out something reasonable with Murray. I personally think he is just starting to reach his peak and can be the guy for the next three seasons before he starts to wear down.

 

[Carolina Cowboy]

I want DeMarco to stay. There are ways to make that happen that work for both sides. They just have to figure it out. Please do so.

 

[Doomsday101]

What's your window of contention?

If it's 2 or 3 years what do you care?

And why don't we pay age? Generally speaking?

Well older players are less effective and more injury prone.

Murray is.... Today.... Less effective than Peterson AND more injury prone.

Why again would we want him over All Day?

Peterson has played 16 game once in his career, he has had his share of injuries

 

[casmith07]

What's your window of contention?

If it's 2 or 3 years what do you care?

And why don't we pay age? Generally speaking?

Well older players are less effective and more injury prone.

Murray is.... Today.... Less effective than Peterson AND more injury prone.

Why again would we want him over All Day?

Our window of contention is intended to be as long as Jason Garrett is the head coach.

2 or 3 years of paying a 29-year-old Adrian Peterson leaves us with a near 33-year-old running back who assuredly will continue to be a progress stopper for any other talent we acquire. We'll be bankrupt at the RB position by the time the contract ends, rather than in a good position to promote from within.

We don't pay age because look at what Jason Garrett has done. DeMarcus Ware's release shows the front office's mentality.

Your statement about effectiveness and "injury prone" is pure conjecture. Neither of those statements is supported by evidence that is worth examining in this situation. Murray has never played for the Minnesota Vikings and Peterson has never played for the Dallas Cowboys, so any comparisons are moot. "Injury prone" is a fun term that fans like to throw around as if they're an athletic trainer or an MD, but they arent. Another moot point.

Why would we want Murray over Peterson? (Also, cute that you refer to him as "All Day" -- confirmation bias has a way of torpedoing your own argument)

- Murray is younger.
- Murray knows the system.
- Murray knows this offensive line.
- Murray grew up in this program.
- Murray is a part of the chemistry of this team.

Just a few reasons that have further reaching implications when it comes to assembling something as complex as a football team. You don't just grab the guy rated 97 on Madden and plug him in and your team is better.