DNA of our SB Teams

[Sydla]

my whole point of this thread was.....If we took a RB like Elliott, we would have an offense that could impose our will on defenses....with that half of the team in place....we then can turn to some of our other needs on defense. i just fail to see a guy like Bosa or Buckner making an impact defensively like a Elliott could on offense.

With this OL you can impose your will with the right 3rd round back.

How do I know that? We did it in 2014.

 

[CowboyChris]

With this OL you can impose your will with the right 3rd round back.

How do I know that? We did it in 2014.

if Bosa or Buckner were the second coming of JJ Watt or DeMarcus Ware...sign me up...but i don't see it.

 

[KJJ]

Then you haven't been paying attention.

I've been paying attention you just need to rethink what you said.

Ask yourself this: Does a team named "Patriots" have to have an elite running back to win a championship? Does a team named "Broncos" need to have an elite running back to win a championship? How about a team named "Giants"? A team named "Buccaneers"? A team named "Steelers"?

The Pats don't need an elite RB they've never won a championship with an elite back they win because of Brady and Belichick. The one common denominator all their championship teams have had are Brady along with Belichick. Everything the Pats do revolves around Brady. Anyone they put around him from receivers to RBs work with him at QB. As for the Broncos I pointed out why they won it all last season it was due to a great defense. You would have to go back to the early 90s to find a Cowboys team that had a defense comparable to what Denver had last season and it probably still wouldn't have been as good. The Cowboys will never have a defense that's so dominate they can win it all without an elite back and Romo having the worst season of his career like Manning did in 2015. Romo's playoff/elimination game record is what it is because we've depended on him to win games especially when it's down to do or die.

We saw in 2014 the only way the Cowboys can contend is with an elite performance by their top runner. Last season we lost our QB for a number of games just like Denver did but couldn't win because of an inconsistent running game that put pressure on our backup QBs and a defense that couldn't rush the passer, make critical stops or force turnovers. As for the Giants we've already discussed why they've won championships they've done it with defense. Are you not paying attention? The Steelers won with defense in 2008 and so did the Bucs during their championship season.

"Defense" isn't a formula.

There's a formula to playing great defense and it starts with drafting, coaching and a system that fits your players.

 

[AdamJT13]

I've been paying attention you just need to rethink what you said.

Not at all.

The Pats don't need an elite RB they've never won a championship with an elite back they win because of Brady and Belichick. The one common denominator all their championship teams have had are Brady along with Belichick. Everything the Pats do revolves around Brady. Anyone they put around him from receivers to RBs work with him at QB. As for the Broncos I pointed out why they won it all last season it was due to a great defense. You would have to go back to the early 90s to find a Cowboys team that had a defense comparable to what Denver had last season and it probably still wouldn't have been as good. The Cowboys will never have a defense that's so dominate they can win it all without an elite back and Romo having the worst season of his career like Manning did in 2015. Romo's playoff/elimination game record is what it is because we've depended on him to win games especially when it's down to do or die.

We saw in 2014 the only way the Cowboys can contend is with an elite performance by their top runner. Last season we lost our QB for a number of games just like Denver did but couldn't win because of an inconsistent running game that put pressure on our backup QBs and a defense that couldn't rush the passer, make critical stops or force turnovers. As for the Giants we've already discussed why they've won championships they've done it with defense. Are you not paying attention? The Steelers won with defense in 2008 and so did the Bucs during their championship season.

I can see why you're not making sense, you don't even have a coherent formula for winning a champiosnhip -- you think the formula depends entirely on the name of the team.

And the reason we didn't win very often last year had almost nothing to do with "an inconsistent running game." We rushed for 233 yards against the Giants and lost. We rushed for 171 against the Packers and lost. We rushed for 134 against the Eagles and lost. We rushed for 133 against the Jets and lost. We averaged anywhere from 4.6 to 8.6 yards per carry in those games and still lost.

There's a formula to playing great defense and it starts with drafting, coaching and a system that fits your players.

Again, that's not a formula. Every team drafts and coaches, so I guess all you need for a great defense is "a system that fits your players," huh?

 

[KJJ]

I can see why you're not making sense, you don't even have a coherent formula for winning a champiosnhip -- you think the formula depends entirely on the name of the team.

I'm making plenty of sense just not to you. The formula for winning a championship is what it's always been great coaching, efficient QB play and being solid offensively and defensively. The Pats win consistently because the strength of their team is Tom Brady and they've won through the years by building around him which is what most teams do when they have a great QB. They're 1-2 in their last 2 SBs because their defense hasn't been near as good as their offense. Their defense has given up big plays in critical moments and it cost them a couple of SB's. It was a huge defensive play that won them their last SB. You have to work with the strength of your team but any team that relies heavily on their offense and QB to win games is going to run into trouble in the games that matter most even a team with Tom Brady.

And the reason we didn't win very often last year had almost nothing to do with "an inconsistent running game." We rushed for 233 yards against the Giants and lost. We rushed for 171 against the Packers and lost. We rushed for 134 against the Eagles and lost. We rushed for 133 against the Jets and lost. We averaged anywhere from 4.6 to 8.6 yards per carry in those games and still lost.

An inconsistent running game certainly played a part in our struggles last season. Romo being in long down situations from an inconsistent running game allowed the defense to pin their ears back and come after him vs Philly and Carolina. It was McFadden having 3 negative carries in his first 7 attempts vs Carolina that put the game on Romo's shoulders and had Carolina's D licking their chops. Romo likely would have never survived the 2014 season had it not been for Murray and our running game. Our inconsistent running game that was last in the league on 3rd and one as of the second week in Dec in 2015 is what put pressure on our backup QBs.

Our running game was more than 400 yards behind what it produced in 2014 and we had half as many rushing TD's which is why we had to settle for so many FG attempts. If you can't run the ball consistently/efficiently games are going to be put on your QB and defense. As for the yards we rushed for vs the Packers, Eagles, and Jets they weren't leading to points. McFadden rushed for 328 yards in those games and didn't score a single TD.

Despite a career high in carries playing behind arguably the top run blocking OL in the league he only scored 3 rushing TD's which was well behind the top rushers last season. Producing yards doesn't win games points win games. Yards don't mean a damn thing if they're not leading to TD's. Between the 20s McFadden wasn't that bad but in the redzone he and our other backs didn't get it done.

Again, that's not a formula. Every team drafts and coaches, so I guess all you need for a great defense is "a system that fits your players," huh?

It's not a formula in your eyes because you're just looking to argue. Every team drafts and coaches but not every team drafts and coaches well which is why so many coaches get the boot at the end of every season. A system that fits your players doesn't guarantee a great defense if you don't have great players. A system can make a player more effective but it can't make them a great player they're either a great player or they're not. We've tried everything with Mo but he's an average player and no system is going to change that. You're someone who thinks all it takes for a back to become elite is a 1200 yard season for a championship team. Go sell that somewhere else.

 

[percyhoward]

Our inconsistent running game that was last in the league on 3rd and one as of the second week in Dec in 2015 is what put pressure on our backup QBs.

We were running into 8- and 9-man fronts and still finished in the Top 10 in both rushing yards and yards per rush. Imagine the pressure the running game must have felt having to play with those quarterbacks who couldn't take advantage of defenses that were daring us to pass.

 

[KJJ]

We were running into 8- and 9-man fronts and still finished in the Top 10 in both rushing yards and yards per rush. Imagine the pressure the running game must have felt having to play with those quarterbacks who couldn't take advantage of defenses that were daring us to pass.

We finished 9th in rushing and every team that finished ahead of us and 4 teams that finished behind us all had more rushing TD's than we did. Like I pointed out to Adam the rushing yards don't mean a damn thing they weren't weren't leading to TD's. We weren't good rushing the ball in the redzone/goal line situations or efficient in short yardage which put pressure on our QBs. If we had a real running threat in the backfield that defenses respected our backup QBs might have been a little better.

If the running game was better last season than it was in 2014 like you seem to believe it was based on all the stats you post and live by all the experts wouldn't be saying the Cowboys need to get back to running the ball like they did in 2014 and some mock drafts wouldn't have us taking Ezekiel Elliott with the 4th overall pick.

 

[CowboyChris]

I don't think you should use the 2015 season for analysis given that we lost Romo and Dez for the majority of the season. We could've had Adrian Peterson back there and he wouldn't had lived up to his potential.

 

[percyhoward]

I don't think you should use the 2015 season for analysis given that we lost Romo and Dez for the majority of the season. We could've had Adrian Peterson back there and he wouldn't had lived up to his potential.

In 2009, when Favre led the Vikings to the playoffs, Peterson had 14 TD on runs from inside the 5-yard line. The next year when Favre wasn't as effective, Peterson had 9 TD from inside the 5-yard line. Since then, with lesser QB, he's had 6, 6, 4, and 4.

With an elite QB over his whole career, Peterson would already be threatening Emmitt's career total of 164 rushing TD. Instead, he has 97.

 

[LocimusPrime]

i agree with most of your points, except if we have a chance at Goff or Wentz at #4....given the status of our QB position, i just can't pass on that deal. but as for Elliott....he is in my opinion a superstar in this league, and if you pair that up with Dez....lookout

Your sig has roger, Troy, and Romo. One doesn't belong ( yet).

 

[Craig]

Lets ignore that the game has changed a ton in 2 decades. When a team has elite players in every unit on the team, you look like an idiot pointing at one player as a reason they were succesful. Also, trent richardson is the next emmitt smith. They dont have to waste a draft pick to add him right now. Championship x 3.

 

[AdamJT13]

An inconsistent running game certainly played a part in our struggles last season.

A very small part, if any.

Romo being in long down situations from an inconsistent running game allowed the defense to pin their ears back and come after him vs Philly and Carolina.

That's a completely bogus argument. Neither of Romo's injuries had anything to do with the running game.

Our running game was more than 400 yards behind what it produced in 2014

Mostly because we didn't have the luxury of running the ball to protect a lead in the fourth quarter -- our pass offense and pass defense were terrible, for the most part. And those are what actually decide games the majority of the time. In our past 38 games, the team that has passed better is 37-1 (with the only loss coming on a last-minute TD). The team that has rushed better is 19-19.

You're someone who thinks all it takes for a back to become elite is a 1200 yard season for a championship team.

That's certainly not my opinion. I said that's what other people think -- hence the quotes around "elite." Playing on a championship team enhances the perception of players, regardless of how good they actually are in comparison with players on other teams. Like I said, if you haven't realized that by now, then you haven't been paying attention.

 

[percyhoward]

Our running game was more than 400 yards behind what it produced in 2014...

Mostly because we didn't have the luxury of running the ball to protect a lead in the fourth quarter.

Also because we didn't have the luxury of a Romo to bail us out if the run gained 2 yards or less, as Murray's 1st- and 2nd-down runs did 70 times in the last 8 games of 2014. Below is 2nd or 3rd down, 7-12 yards to go in the second half of that season.

 

[KJJ]

A very small part, if any.

It was more than a small part. In the opener Romo attempted 45 passes which was more attempts than he had in any game in 2014. The combination of Randle and McFadden averaged under 4.0 a carry. That game was put on Romo's shoulders and it took a huge mistake by the Giants and a great comeback by Romo for the Cowboys not to start the season 0-1. I said immediately after that game if this is how it's going to be this season with Romo back having to carry the offense he won't last the season...BINGO! In week 2 the running game once again averaged under 4.0 a carry and Romo was on pace for another 40+ attempt game when he was injured. We were in a long down situation and with Philly not concerned about the run pinned their ears back and came after Romo and he was injured.

We were clearly not as efficient on first and second down like we were with Murray in 2014. In the Tampa game which was a critical game for the Cowboys McFadden was HORRIBLE averaging 1.9 a carry on 17 carries. With under 6 minutes to play and the Cowboys leading McFadden took a sizable loss on a first down play which put the Cowboys in a passing situation the next 2 downs which led to a punt and the Bucs pulling the game out in the final minute. I can point to examples a page long where the running game failed us putting all the pressure on our QBs. If the running game wasn't a problem there wouldn't be mock drafts out there having the Cowboys taking Elliott with the 4th overall pick.

That's a completely bogus argument. Neither of Romo's injuries had anything to do with the running game.

Read what I just said.

Mostly because we didn't have the luxury of running the ball to protect a lead in the fourth quarter -- our pass offense and pass defense were terrible, for the most part. And those are what actually decide games the majority of the time. In our past 38 games, the team that has passed better is 37-1 (with the only loss coming on a last-minute TD). The team that has rushed better is 19-19.

One of the reasons we couldn't get leads was the lack of consistency in the running game that didn't allow us to put points on the board or maintain the ball like we did in 2014. In 2014 the defense spent an average of 12 fewer plays on the field than they did in 2013. Last season the defense was having to spend too much time on the field and began wearing down in games. The defense was exposed more last season due to the lack of consistency with the running game and our QB situation. We clearly weren't as good running the ball in the redzone or in goal line situations. We didn't have a back like Murray who could power the ball into the endzone like he did vs Seattle in 2014. Go back and watch some of the tough runs that kept the chains moving vs Seattle that we didn't see last season. Most of the games you mentioned where we had good rushing averages happened in games that were meaningless because the Cowboys and even some of their opponents were done late in the season. Some of McFadden's best averages happened the final month of the season when we were done.

That's certainly not my opinion. I said that's what other people think -- hence the quotes around "elite." Playing on a championship team enhances the perception of players, regardless of how good they actually are in comparison with players on other teams. Like I said, if you haven't realized that by now, then you haven't been paying attention.

Show me where other people think that a back that rushes for 1200 yards on a SB winning team makes that back elite? I've never heard anyone say that not even on this board where absurdity is the norm. Playing on a championship team may enhance the perception of some QBs but not RBs because it's a passing league today and most teams are pass happy.

 

[Verdict]

Unless there are clones available of our prior super bowl teams, then what our makeup of those teams were is somewhat irrelevant. I think we vastly increase our chances of winning it all if we add a stud running back. I don't know if EE qualifiers at that bell cow, or not (probably does), but if so he makes our team instantly better.

I also think Henry might qualify and you could maybe add two more names to that list although time will tell who they are/were. You don't want to go cheap if you can get another last of the mohicans type of RB.

The defense will be improved a little bit because of the addition of Scandrick from injury. This defense will be statistically much better, if we get the bell cow back, and if Romo, Dez and Co. win the time of possession battle like they did in 2014.

We need a couple of playmakers on defense for sure. but adding Thornton in place of the Golden Cock was a god start.

 

[AdamJT13]

It was more than a small part. In the opener Romo attempted 45 passes which was more attempts than he had in any game in 2014. The combination of Randle and McFadden averaged under 4.0 a carry. That game was put on Romo's shoulders and it took a huge mistake by the Giants and a great comeback by Romo for the Cowboys not to start the season 0-1. I said immediately after that game if this is how it's going to be this season with Romo back having to carry the offense he won't last the season...BINGO! In week 2 the running game once again averaged under 4.0 a carry and Romo was on pace for another 40+ attempt game when he was injured.

So your argument that the running game was the problem is based on two games that we won? Gotcha.

We were in a long down situation and with Philly not concerned about the run pinned their ears back and came after Romo and he was injured.

They weren't concerned about the run because it was an empty backfield.

We were clearly not as efficient on first and second down like we were with Murray in 2014.

We were the third-best rushing team in the NFL on first and second downs last season -- same as we were with Murray in 2014.

Read what I just said.

It's still wrong.

One of the reasons we couldn't get leads was the lack of consistency in the running game that didn't allow us to put points on the board or maintain the ball like we did in 2014.

No, we couldn't get or maintain leads because our pass offense and pass defense were, for the most part, terrible.

In 2014 the defense spent an average of 12 fewer plays on the field than they did in 2013. Last season the defense was having to spend too much time on the field and began wearing down in games. The defense was exposed more last season due to the lack of consistency with the running game and our QB situation.

That's another bogus argument, aside from the fact that your math is wrong. (The defense was on the field for 1,094 plays in 2013, 978 plays in 2014 and 998 plays in 2015 -- nowhere near a difference of 12 plays per game. The difference between 2014 and 2015 was 1.25 plays per game.)

First of all, how much the defense is on the field depends as much or more on the defense itself than it does on the offense. The defense has to get itself off the field at some point. Secondly, our offense in 2015 averaged a whole 2 seconds less per possession than we did in 2014. Two seconds! And finally, offensive time of possession has more to do with completion percentage and third-down conversions than it does with how much or how well you run the ball.

Show me where other people think that a back that rushes for 1200 yards on a SB winning team makes that back elite? I've never heard anyone say that not even on this board where absurdity is the norm. Playing on a championship team may enhance the perception of some QBs but not RBs because it's a passing league today and most teams are pass happy.

Um, YOU claimed that Duane Thomas was an "elite" running back. His career high was 803 yards. He had less than that the year we won the Super Bowl.

Talk about absurdity.

 

[KJJ]

So your argument that the running game was the problem is based on two games that we won? Gotcha.

Let this go you're just wasting both our time. We won the first 2 games with Romo having to carry the offense due to an inefficient running game that contributed to him being injured. Once he went down in week 2 our season was pretty much over and everyone knew it. In the first 2 games of the 2014 season Romo attempted 67 passes in 8 full quarters. In the first 2 weeks of the 2015 season he attempted 72 passes in just over 6 quarters. McFadden and Randle combined for 163 yards rushing in the first 2 games with no rushing TD's. In 2014 Murray rushed for 285 yards in the first 2 games with 2 rushing TD's which took a lot of pressure off Romo.

We were the third-best rushing team in the NFL on first and second downs last season -- same as we were with Murray in 2014.

It didn't lead to points and we were the worst team in the entire league on 3rd and one as of the second week in Dec. By that time the Cowboys season was done!

Um, YOU claimed that Duane Thomas was an "elite" running back. His career high was 803 yards. He had less than that the year we won the Super Bowl.

Talk about absurdity.

During that period he was considered an elite back. It was either Dan Reeves or Bob Lilly that said they thought he would be better than Jim Brown. How did they come up with that if he wasn't that good? He averaged 5.3 a carry in 1970 as a rookie and 4.5 in 71 he was one of the main reasons the Cowboys made it to the SB both years. He also scored 16 TD's during those 2 seasons. The Cowboys had 3 very talented backs in Garrison and Hill so Thomas was splitting carries.

 

[AdamJT13]

Let this go you're just wasting both our time. We won the first 2 games with Romo having to carry the offense due to an inefficient running game that contributed to him being injured.

The "inefficient" running game didn't cause us to lose either of those games, did it? Obviously not, because the running game has little effect on winning or losing in the NFL.

And the running game certainly didn't cause Romo to get injured. Are you pretending that Murray never got tackled for a 1-yard loss in 2014, that we never passed on second-and-11 in 2014, that we never passed out of an empty backfield in 2014 or that Romo never got sacked (or injured) in 2014?

It didn't lead to points

Exactly. That's because our passing offense was so poor. It doesn't matter how well you run if you can't pass. Poor running doesn't cause you to lose if you can pass better than your opponent, and running well doesn't help you win if you don't pass better than your opponent. That gets proved throughout the league, over and over every year.

During that period he was considered an elite back.

No, he was considered a guy who had potential and never lived up to it.

 

[KJJ]

The "inefficient" running game didn't cause us to lose either of those games, did it? Obviously not, because the running game has little effect on winning or losing in the NFL.

No, but it helped cost us Romo and the running game was the main reason the team went 12-4 in 2014. If the running game has little effect on winning and losing Elliott wouldn't be projected to be a top 10 pick and some mocks wouldn't have the Cowboys taking him.

No, he was considered a guy who had potential and never lived up to it.

He was a guy who showed great potential which is why Reeves or Lilly thought he would be better than Jim Brown and he was one of the main reasons the Cowboys made it to their first two Super Bowl's.

 

[AdamJT13]

No, but it helped cost us Romo

No, it did not. Quarterbacks get sacked. Some of them cause injuries. Saying that the running game contributed to Romo's injury is completely nonsensical. Did Romo never have to pass in 2014? Did Romo never get sacked in 2014? Did Romo never get injured in 2014?

and the running game was the main reason the team went 12-4 in 2014.

No, it was not. Every single game we played that season was won by the team that passed better (as are the vast majority of games in the NFL). It didn't matter if we ran the ball well or ran it poorly -- if we passed better than the opponent, we won. If the opponent passed better, we lost. The same thing has been true in 37 of our past 38 games.

If the running game has little effect on winning and losing Elliott wouldn't be projected to be a top 10 pick and some mocks wouldn't have the Cowboys taking him.

There is no logic in that statement. That's like saying, "If junk food isn't healthy, then millions of people wouldn't be eating it every day." And you're confusing a player or even a position with a type of offensive play.

He was a guy who showed great potential which is why Reeves or Lilly thought he would be better than Jim Brown and he was one of the main reasons the Cowboys made it to their first two Super Bowl's.

So you're saying he was elite because he helped us get to the Super Bowl? I rest my case.