egn22
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,884
- Reaction score
- 2,102
Talent and Pedigree vs. Potential
I'm a Demarco Murray fan, i believe in Murray and he's one of my favorite Cowboys. but the fact of the matter is to this point, Murray has been injury prone, and we knew going into the draft that RB depth was something we needed to consider. If Murray happens to do what to this point he's consistently done which is go down with an injury, would you prefer to have an Eddie Lacy or even Christine Michael type carrying the load, or Lance Dunbar?
There have been a lot of complaints about Murray's lack of vision, mainly due to Terrell Davis' recent breakdown of film on NFL network. I don't buy into this because from what i've seen Murray when healthy has been great. He missed a few opportunities in the KC game but so did Romo, so did Dez, so did Carter, big deal. So my point here isn't that i want to bench Murray or get rid of him. I just want us to pile up as much elite talent as we can get and Eddie Lacy seems like a no brainer when you put him next to Escobar.
I know its the past, i know "good grief its only the second week of the season", i get all of that. But this is a public forum and i want to express my confusion over how we determine which player will be the best asset per round. I think Christine Michael hits the hole extremely hard, and offers elite athleticism at the RB position that would be immensely needed if Murray were to go down. Lacy also offers his own skillset that would be huge if Murray were to go down.
If Witten were to go down, Hanna would be our starter, and we'd be scrambling looking for free agents to provide depth. So why was our 2nd round pick Gavin Escobar????
At least Murray haters would have a better argument for benching Murray than Lance Freaking Dunbar who in my opinion is just a guy.
I'm a Demarco Murray fan, i believe in Murray and he's one of my favorite Cowboys. but the fact of the matter is to this point, Murray has been injury prone, and we knew going into the draft that RB depth was something we needed to consider. If Murray happens to do what to this point he's consistently done which is go down with an injury, would you prefer to have an Eddie Lacy or even Christine Michael type carrying the load, or Lance Dunbar?
There have been a lot of complaints about Murray's lack of vision, mainly due to Terrell Davis' recent breakdown of film on NFL network. I don't buy into this because from what i've seen Murray when healthy has been great. He missed a few opportunities in the KC game but so did Romo, so did Dez, so did Carter, big deal. So my point here isn't that i want to bench Murray or get rid of him. I just want us to pile up as much elite talent as we can get and Eddie Lacy seems like a no brainer when you put him next to Escobar.
I know its the past, i know "good grief its only the second week of the season", i get all of that. But this is a public forum and i want to express my confusion over how we determine which player will be the best asset per round. I think Christine Michael hits the hole extremely hard, and offers elite athleticism at the RB position that would be immensely needed if Murray were to go down. Lacy also offers his own skillset that would be huge if Murray were to go down.
If Witten were to go down, Hanna would be our starter, and we'd be scrambling looking for free agents to provide depth. So why was our 2nd round pick Gavin Escobar????
At least Murray haters would have a better argument for benching Murray than Lance Freaking Dunbar who in my opinion is just a guy.
