"Good RBs make the Oline look good & not the reverse"

[bayeslife]

Always was... But agendas fuel the "if it wasn't for that oline" angle.

Yeah I remember all those other years he got 1800 yards rushing. Good times.

 

[Bleu Star]

Ask Demarco if he thinks a good OL means something.

Ask the OL if they think a good RB means something. Then as them if they think they're blocking for good RBs. Do that off the record though.

 

[Bleu Star]

Yeah I remember all those other years he got 1800 yards rushing. Good times.

Our strategy shifted to a run oriented scheme. One that enjoyed success by demoralizing opposing defenses on the ground and putting up points thus keeping our lackluster defense fresh last year. This year, we have abandoned that "we're going to run it & we don't care if you know" mentality and our patchwork defense is suffering as a result. Same offensive linemen... Different scheme/strategy this year. Hmmmm. I wonder why.

 

[dfan32]

That was quoted yesterday by a prominent SEC head coach & I completely agree.

The Oline can have have pro bowlers at every position but without that runner they will see an average effort on the ground practically every time. This can wear in the psyche of even the most dominant of offensive lines.

The RB needs to know how to hit the hole, when to hit it, when to exhibit patience, and how to use good vision as a tool to keep the chains moving.

I was just struck by that comment because, in many ways, it parallels what we are seeing right now I'm that dynamic between our offensive line and the RBs we are tossing in there behind them. You best believe that an oline will more enthusiastically embrace a RB that is consistently moving the chains vs one that gains negative yards regularly while supplementing with the occasional long run. When those long runs are few & far between, it is detrimental to the psyche of the guys in the trenches doing work.

I strongly believe the perception of an average effort from our oline early on is directly tied to who we are lining up behind them. Those guys aren't stupid. They know a lead run with the fb manned by Clutz is destined for failure. They know that the current pool of RBs is not of the quality to sustain drives. They need a spark.

I'm hopeful that spark will finally come tomorrow with the combination of Christine Michael and Randle sharing the load. It really doesn't matter whether you go with Randle or McFadden to supplement Michael. They're both the same scatback type of player. Sadly, McFadden at his size, does indeed operate like a scatback. We already have three of those in Randle, McFadden, & Dunbar.

I thought that coach's comments were spot on. An oline does not make a rb. His perspective spits clearly in the faces of those that have crowed about how our oline made Demarco. I've always considered that a line of crap. Our "system" made Demarco and he flourished in it.

I'm sure you would agree that some of what you are describing takes playing time together to learn each others tendencies and abilities. None of these backs or OL for that matter had any significant playing time in preseason at all, much less together. Not saying that is gonna happen but with a little patience, good things happen. Same with Micheals, I want to see what he can do too but I doubt if he steps in and burns up the turf in his first game either.

 

[KJJ]

Great read.. Especially that last part. Kinda ironic huh... lol

You know how it is here FANS get carried away with everything and they got carried with the OL. Many convinced themselves the Cowboys running game wouldn't miss a beat with the backs they have due to the OL. Randle claimed Murray left some meat on the bone last season and he ended up putting some meat back on the bone after gaining 91 yards in the first half against Atlanta and ending up with 87 yards.

 

[Bleu Star]

You know how it is here FANS get carried away with everything and they got carried with the OL. Many convinced themselves the Cowboys running game wouldn't miss a beat with the backs they have due to the OL. Randle claimed Murray left some meat on the bone last season and he ended up putting some meat back on the bone after gaining 91 yards in the first half against Atlanta and ending up with 87 yards.

You could feed 1000 starving children in Africa with the amount of meat Randle left on the bone in that second half last week.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

"Only the Sith deal in absolutes"

 

[Ren]

Anyone think Philly is happy about the money they gave Murray right about now?Of course we would be better if he was still here but he was not worth his asking price.

 

[bayeslife]

Our strategy shifted to a run oriented scheme. One that enjoyed success by demoralizing opposing defenses on the ground and putting up points thus keeping our lackluster defense fresh last year. This year, we have abandoned that "we're going to run it & we don't care if you know" mentality and our patchwork defense is suffering as a result. Same offensive linemen... Different scheme/strategy this year. Hmmmm. I wonder why.

Because the offensive line is not blocking on the same level they were last year. Unless you're implying that Murray magically made the linemen block better which is a hilarious assumption.

 

[visionary]

Name all the running backs who had really good years behind bad offensive lines.... I'll wait.

AP
AP
AP
AP
AP
Lynch
Lynch
Lynch
Lynch
McCoy
McCoy
McCoy

I could go on

Pretty much EVERY elite RB

Do you really believe all those RBs have have elite OLs every year they put up pro bowl numbers?

They need good OLs not GREAT OLs

We have a great OL but ANY RB cannot be a pro bowler even with this OL

Our RBs are below average

 

[Bleu Star]

Because the offensive line is not blocking on the same level they were last year. Unless you're implying that Murray magically made the linemen block better which is a hilarious assumption.

Once again, you and the few others that keep pumping murray murray murray aren't getting the gist of why I created this thread. Murray is old news. I'm not going to retype it. You quoted it & read it. Take it as you will.

 

[Bleu Star]

Our RBs are below average

At least someone gets it.

 

[fortdick]

At least someone gets it.

Are they below average because off system or scheme?

 

[Bleu Star]

Are they below average because off system or scheme?

They're just plain below avg. So your scheming is limited. Your ability to assert certain schemes in situational parts of the game is limited. As an OC, you only trust them to do so much for you.

 

[Jarv]

Actually, it's my love for a great ground game that moves the chains, eats clock, and defeats opposing defenses. We had it last year and now we don't. I believe it is a crucial part of our offensive potential for success. How do we get it back? Again, I think Christine Michael will give us our best chance to get back to that.

As to the above in bold, me too...Big Time!

Murray was a great runner, but not elite, only because he lacked top end the last couple of years to break the 50+ yarders. Here's something else to chew on may explain his grinding style...and lack of big runs.

Dez Bryant, which he doesn't have in Philly. Teams would keep a safety high to help with Dez as a over the top help. This kept the safety out of the box giving Murray one less defender in the short to intermediate runs, but if he did break one, there was always that deep safety doubling Dez with an angle to cut off Murray for the long run.

Hopefully our run blocking will improve. Our LT had a biceps injury, were lucky not to have lost him for the season. Our RG has a stinger that still needs a neckbrace. Our LG is hopefully returning this week and our RT is nearing his end it seems. Clutts sucks...

Having said all that, I think we run for 150+ next week, they are also gelling.

 

[Fontaine]

That's not really working out to well for Murray in philly.

 

[Bleu Star]

That's not really working out to well for Murray in philly.

The scheme made Murray in big D. Take him out of the scheme, and he's avg if not allowed to fit properly. Ok. Let's brush that aside and really focus. Let's ask ourselves a question.

Why isn't the scheme allowing our two rbs to enjoy the same success behind largely the same offensive line?

I have my opinion and it's well documented here. What's yours?

 

[Kevinicus]

The scheme made Murray in big D. Take him out of the scheme, and he's avg if not allowed to fit properly. Ok. Let's brush that aside and really focus. Let's ask ourselves a question.

Why isn't the scheme allowing our two rbs to enjoy the same success behind largely the same offensive line?

I have my opinion and it's well documented here. What's yours?

1. 2.5 weeks with no Dez.
2. 1.5 weeks with no Romo.
3. 2 weeks without Leary.
4. Line not blocking as well thus far this year.
5. One game was against Philly who Murray also struggled against.
6. They ran for over 6 ypc in the last game.
7. Circumstances in game one limited rushing attempts.

 

[JoeKing]

This really isn't a debate. The OP isn't even controversial, it's pure rubbish. This is just a propaganda ploy to gain favorability to put CMike in the game. CMike will only see time on the field when the coaching staff agree it is time for it to happen and not a moment earlier. Murray is a disaster this year so whoever thought he was a good or even just decent RB without a good O-line can stop propagating that nonsense right now.

 

[TrailBlazer]

That was quoted yesterday by a prominent SEC head coach & I completely agree.

The Oline can have have pro bowlers at every position but without that runner they will see an average effort on the ground practically every time. This can wear in the psyche of even the most dominant of offensive lines.

The RB needs to know how to hit the hole, when to hit it, when to exhibit patience, and how to use good vision as a tool to keep the chains moving.

I was just struck by that comment because, in many ways, it parallels what we are seeing right now I'm that dynamic between our offensive line and the RBs we are tossing in there behind them. You best believe that an oline will more enthusiastically embrace a RB that is consistently moving the chains vs one that gains negative yards regularly while supplementing with the occasional long run. When those long runs are few & far between, it is detrimental to the psyche of the guys in the trenches doing work.

I strongly believe the perception of an average effort from our oline early on is directly tied to who we are lining up behind them. Those guys aren't stupid. They know a lead run with the fb manned by Clutz is destined for failure. They know that the current pool of RBs is not of the quality to sustain drives. They need a spark.

I'm hopeful that spark will finally come tomorrow with the combination of Christine Michael and Randle sharing the load. It really doesn't matter whether you go with Randle or McFadden to supplement Michael. They're both the same scatback type of player. Sadly, McFadden at his size, does indeed operate like a scatback. We already have three of those in Randle, McFadden, & Dunbar.

I thought that coach's comments were spot on. An oline does not make a rb. His perspective spits clearly in the faces of those that have crowed about how our oline made Demarco. I've always considered that a line of crap. Our "system" made Demarco and he flourished in it.

Are you new to sports?