Signed by Cowboys Dunbar re-signs ** One Year $1.75M **

coult44

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,257
Reaction score
7,071
How hilarious would it be if we're sitting there in the 6th round and still haven't added a RB again?

And you thought that McFadden/Dunbar thing was for 2015 only. This is our future, baby.

As hilarious as it is to be sitting here still without having signed a DE, a DB, or a backup QB.
 

dfense

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,026
Reaction score
6,456
Funny, when they sign someone, the board complains. When they don't sign someone, the board complains.

When healthy, Dunbar is a open field, elusive, third down force. For 1.75 it's a steal.

He got injured with a direct shot to the side of his planted knee. Any RB would have been injured on that hit.
 

Risen Star

Likes Collector
Messages
86,033
Reaction score
201,272
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Funny, when they sign someone, the board complains. When they don't sign someone, the board complains.

When healthy, Dunbar is a open field, elusive, third down force. For 1.75 it's a steal.

He got injured with a direct shot to the side of his planted knee. Any RB would have been injured on that hit.

Well considering he went out in FA and didn't find anything better than a 1 year deal here for that money, I'd say the league disagrees with you.
 

KDM256

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,233
Reaction score
739
Don't mind the Dunbar signing at the price. This move "should" help with depth at the running back position. I get most fans can't count on Dunbar to stay healthy the entire season but when he's healthy, Dunbar can be an asset to this organization. I liked what I saw in Dunbar before he went down last year.

All we need now is a workhorse back like Elliott or Henry, plus add another UDFA and we "should" be good to go at the running back position.


Keyword in this post is "Should"
 

erod

Well-Known Member
Messages
37,733
Reaction score
58,174
This was a good signing. To say differently is to have not watched Dunbar last year; he was off to an amazing start.

Draft a back in the first or second round, and suddenly, an iffy position becomes one of the strongest on the team.
 

conner01

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,780
Reaction score
25,744
He was great for us. He's just injured too much and I just believe Lucky can do the job better, as an overall player he seemed to get more comfortable as the season went on.

I like lucky but lucky is a WR and return guy and I think will be a huge weapon in the return game this year but having a back coming out of the backfield creates more mismatches
 

mattjames2010

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,439
Reaction score
20,121
Well considering he went out in FA and didn't find anything better than a 1 year deal here for that money, I'd say the league disagrees with you.

Who cares if the league disagrees? He was highly productive before getting injured last year, he knows our playbook and apparently knows it well. I care about if he's fit for our offense, he is.
 

Swanny

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,509
Reaction score
3,261
I don't understand how there are so many complaints about a signing for a 1 year deal for 1.75 million. He's not a progress stopper. If the Cowboys draft a Rookie RB and can't beat out Dunbar for playing time then Dunbar isn't a progress stopper. The rookie just isn't good. Put the blame on the rookie not on Dunbar being a progress stopper.
 

Reality

Staff member
Messages
30,374
Reaction score
68,941
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Did he get a signing bonus on this 1 year deal? If so and he is not on the roster in September, then that is a cap hit, although probably a small one.

Of course there would be a small cap hit if he got a bonus, but as I said, it will be more than worth it as an insurance policy. it would be a lot different if the cap hit would be $2-3 million due to a 3-4 year contract. Even if there is a small signing bonus, this is a safe signing since they did not get a proven starting running back in free agency and the draft is still to come. This way, if they get to the 3-5 rounds and the only running backs they like that are left are considered low round picks, they don't have to waste a mid-round pick on the guy (which people would definitely complain about, myself included).

If they had signed Dunbar to a multi-year deal, I would have not liked that at all. He's not a bad running back, but he is not a starting running back and we have no idea how much his speed and lateral movement will be affected by his knee injury. But signing him to a one year deal now takes the pressure off having to draft low round picks in the mid-rounds and also let's the team fill other holes should higher round picks that we like remain on the board during the mid-rounds.

Not to mention, should the running back situation still be in bad shape after the draft, they have enough cap room that they could trade for a starting running back or sign a veteran who gets cut by another team during pre-season.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Who cares if the league disagrees? He was highly productive before getting injured last year, he knows our playbook and apparently knows it well. I care about if he's fit for our offense, he is.

He visited three other teams, with the leg still hobbled. I don't think it's fair to say the league disagreed. What was probably at issue was the length of a deal. So he came back to an offense he was familiar with for a short term prove-it-again deal, hoping to cash in on a short contract after that.
 

Reality

Staff member
Messages
30,374
Reaction score
68,941
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I don't understand how there are so many complaints about a signing for a 1 year deal for 1.75 million. He's not a progress stopper. If the Cowboys draft a Rookie RB and can't beat out Dunbar for playing time then Dunbar isn't a progress stopper. The rookie just isn't good. Put the blame on the rookie not on Dunbar being a progress stopper.

That's exactly what I've been saying! I would be right here complaining if they gave him a 3-4 year deal, but a 1-year deal? That's a smart move, at least for now, and one that can be undone later if someone beats him out.
 

MichaelWinicki

"You want some?"
Staff member
Messages
47,982
Reaction score
27,879
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Of course there would be a small cap hit if he got a bonus, but as I said, it will be more than worth it as an insurance policy. it would be a lot different if the cap hit would be $2-3 million due to a 3-4 year contract. Even if there is a small signing bonus, this is a safe signing since they did not get a proven starting running back in free agency and the draft is still to come. This way, if they get to the 3-5 rounds and the only running backs they like that are left are considered low round picks, they don't have to waste a mid-round pick on the guy (which people would definitely complain about, myself included).

If they had signed Dunbar to a multi-year deal, I would have not liked that at all. He's not a bad running back, but he is not a starting running back and we have no idea how much his speed and lateral movement will be affected by his knee injury. But signing him to a one year deal now takes the pressure off having to draft low round picks in the mid-rounds and also let's the team fill other holes should higher round picks that we like remain on the board during the mid-rounds.

Not to mention, should the running back situation still be in bad shape after the draft, they have enough cap room that they could trade for a starting running back or sign a veteran who gets cut by another team during pre-season.

Agreed. I don't see much downside to bringing him into camp.
 

PAINFROMUKRAINE

Well-Known Member
Messages
350
Reaction score
317
YearTeamLeagueGGSRushYdsAvgLgTDRecYdsLgTDFum
2015 Dallas NFL4056713.4450212153900
2014 Dallas NFL16029993.4140182174000
2013 Dallas NFL90301505.04507591701
2012 Dallas NFL12021753.61806331401

Based on the stats above and his availability, does this player need to be back on the team for 1.75 Million. The 3 - year Tom Laundry Rule has passed for this scrub. Move on to a better all-around back instead of hoping that he is a "Mini Version of Darren Sproles". How many years can this team wait for players to produce. This is the NFL not College Football.
 

Idgit

Fattening up
Staff member
Messages
58,971
Reaction score
60,826
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
YearTeamLeagueGGSRushYdsAvgLgTDRecYdsLgTDFum
2015 Dallas NFL4056713.4450212153900
2014 Dallas NFL16029993.4140182174000
2013 Dallas NFL90301505.04507591701
2012 Dallas NFL12021753.61806331401

Based on the stats above and his availability, does this player need to be back on the team for 1.75 Million. The 3 - year Tom Laundry Rule has passed for this scrub. Move on to a better all-around back instead of hoping that he is a "Mini Version of Darren Sproles". How many years can this team wait for players to produce. This is the NFL not College Football.

The problem with your analysis is that this is a player who actually *has* produced when he's gotten reps. His issues have been the injuries, and the playing behind Demarco Murray thing.

This isn't a starting RB you're complaining about. He's a role-playing RB3 who provides a specific type of challenge to defenses because of the ways he can be used. It's completely mystifying to me how any fan of the team could watch him play, see how he's used, and still have a problem with the particular one year deal we just signed him to. Like, brain-dead mystifying to me.
 

mattjames2010

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,439
Reaction score
20,121
LOL. Yes. The entire league gifted the Cowboys a cheap play maker.

Or maybe the 31 other teams are on to something?

Again, I don't know what you're struggling with here dude. Other teams passing on Dunbar does not freakin' mean he is not productive here! Other teams passing on him doesn't matter. Did he produce here last year? Yes. Is injury a concern? Yes, and it's why we let him test the market and why he got a cheap deal.

And it's hilarious to me you're the person complaining about this. You wanted Reggie Wayne last year when every team but the Patriots passed on him and reports stated he couldn't run even a 4.7 anymore, but us bringing in Dunbar is a travesty.
 

PAINFROMUKRAINE

Well-Known Member
Messages
350
Reaction score
317
The problem with your analysis is that this is a player who actually *has* produced when he's gotten reps. His issues have been the injuries, and the playing behind Demarco Murray thing.

This isn't a starting RB you're complaining about. He's a role-playing RB3 who provides a specific type of challenge to defenses because of the ways he can be used. It's completely mystifying to me how any fan of the team could watch him play, see how he's used, and still have a problem with the particular one year deal we just signed him to. Like, brain-dead mystifying to me.

Role Players should be paid accordingly. "Minimum Salary". Please see the Contract Terms for T Charlie Brown and CB Josh Thomas as reference for what Dunbar's Contract Terms should have been. Why spend extra cap money when it is not necessary.
 
Top