I must say, Sorry for another D. Murray thread

[CowboyRoy]

While I agree the Cowboys need Murray, or at least a back like him, his asking price was simply too high. My wish now is the Cowboys drafted a back instead of Chaz Green in the third round.

I'm no expert, but to me Joseph Randle is trying to break every run for 60 yards and Darren McFadden is tiptoeing through the hole. My hope is Christine Michael becomes the Murray-like back the Cowboys need.

LOL.......exactly. Some homers defended the Chaz Green pick. Should have taken the back.

 

[Rockport]

What does this have to do with winning the Least...I mean East?
So if anyone believes we made a mistake by letting the AP Player of the year walk away while we have a poor running game then this person automatically believes we won't win the East? You can't be serious with this crap right?

And what is holding someone accountable even mean?
Should we hold everyone accountable for having opinions different than others for all topics?
I'll pray for you.

You are ALWAYS negative.

 

[superonyx]

Im positive that you are wrong.
I have been and will be negative concerning the running back situation until they prove otherwise.
I was willing to give this committee a chance and see if they could pick up where Murray left off.
You consider anyone who isnt a blind homer as being negative. It's not my fault they let Murray walk away and turned a strength into our biggest weakness.

But I still believe we win the east and make the playoffs. So I am not that negative.

 

[Rockport]

Im positive that you are wrong.
I have been and will be negative concerning the running back situation until they prove otherwise.
I was willing to give this committee a chance and see if they could pick up where Murray left off.
You consider anyone who isnt a blind homer as being negative. It's not my fault they let Murray walk away and turned a strength into our biggest weakness.

But I still believe we win the east and make the playoffs. So I am not that negative.

Where dI'd I say that? Never is the answer. You haven't given this "committee" a chance because Michaels hasn't even played yet. And I guarantee if he dies play well you'll be nowhere to be found talking about the running game but instead will start a negative thread about something else. It's just your nature.

 

[superonyx]

Where dI'd I say that? Never is the answer. You haven't given this "committee" a chance because Michaels hasn't even played yet. And I guarantee if he dies play well you'll be nowhere to be found talking about the running game but instead will start a negative thread about something else. It's just your nature.

Wrong again. You see you prefer to assume you know how I think instead of asking and finding out the truth.
I am a Michael supporter. Heck I support all the players on the Cowboys. But that doesn't mean I am not going to call a spade a spade. We have brought in 2 backs already that were not here in camp. Leary just lost his job. I don't want to hear the same bull crap excuses for why we can't run. People want to come up with 34 reasons why our running game stinks each week and none of them are because the backs running the ball are not very good. The truth is that we messed up letting Murray leave. The same posters posting the same garbage over and over to sugar coat the reality doesn't make it true...like the famous line about how Murray would mean we didn't sign Dez or Hardy...that one keeps resurfacing. Meanwhile let's ignore that we paid Crawford Murrays money.

Keep attempting to paint me as negative because it lets you deflect from defending your points...since you really can't anyway. So keep down the attacking the poster because you can't attack their points.

 

[Rockport]

Wrong again. You see you prefer to assume you know how I think instead of asking and finding out the truth.
I am a Michael supporter. Heck I support all the players on the Cowboys. But that doesn't mean I am not going to call a spade a spade. We have brought in 2 backs already that were not here in camp. Leary just lost his job. I don't want to hear the same bull crap excuses for why we can't run. People want to come up with 34 reasons why our running game stinks each week and none of them are because the backs running the ball are not very good. The truth is that we messed up letting Murray leave. The same posters posting the same garbage over and over to sugar coat the reality doesn't make it true...like the famous line about how Murray would mean we didn't sign Dez or Hardy...that one keeps resurfacing. Meanwhile let's ignore that we paid Crawford Murrays money.

Keep attempting to paint me as negative because it lets you deflect from defending your points...since you really can't anyway. So keep down the attacking the poster because you can't attack their points.

I'm just going on your past history of negativity. You reap what you sow.

 

[Doomsday101]

1. Murray of 2015 is not Murray of 2014.

2. The Cowboys blocking of 2015 is not close to the level of the blocking in 2014.

3. In 2015 defenses are loading up against the run because Romo and Dez are out. In 2014 the Cowboys had a very dangerous passing attack that kept defenses from loading up against the run. Defenses double covered Dez in 2014 but in 2015 that extra defender is being used to defend the run.

4. Stats show that the history of RBs with over 370 carries in a season is not good in following seasons. Almost all fall off the next season and most never recover.

5. Stats show that starting RBs start to decline at age 27.

2014 and 2015 Murray I don't think there is a difference. He is being nailed in the back field almost at the point of handoff in Philly. No one is running with the scheme Kelly is using. In Dallas often he was in the I formation in Philly he is not.

I grant you teams are stacking the line with Romo out but I think Murray in this offense could still hammer those 4 yard pickups on a consistent bases and a reason why we are about to see CMike take over because he will hammer the line not bounce around. Randle is great with a hole he can't do jack in terms of hitting the line hard and moving the pile.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Wrong again. You see you prefer to assume you know how I think instead of asking and finding out the truth.
I am a Michael supporter. Heck I support all the players on the Cowboys. But that doesn't mean I am not going to call a spade a spade. We have brought in 2 backs already that were not here in camp. Leary just lost his job. I don't want to hear the same bull crap excuses for why we can't run. People want to come up with 34 reasons why our running game stinks each week and none of them are because the backs running the ball are not very good. The truth is that we messed up letting Murray leave. The same posters posting the same garbage over and over to sugar coat the reality doesn't make it true...like the famous line about how Murray would mean we didn't sign Dez or Hardy...that one keeps resurfacing. Meanwhile let's ignore that we paid Crawford Murrays money.

Keep attempting to paint me as negative because it lets you deflect from defending your points...since you really can't anyway. So keep down the attacking the poster because you can't attack their points.

The world isnt a Dallas Cowboys bubble. There are other backs, both in college and in the pros besides Murray and the cast offs we have now. Murray is only part of the issue. NOT replacing him with quality is even more of the issue. Murray is a good back, but not worth the contract he got. And yes, guys like Crawford and the Kraken all got Murray money. Money much better spent then on Murray. You can see quite clearly that Murray isnt the all world back some thought he was. He is having a marginal season in Philly. He is a certain style back. So some may say he was the perfect fit. His style was a great fit, they just neglected to find a similar back with that style. We also saw where a Dunbar type was also a great fit here. Murray has NO Dunbar in him.

 

[superonyx]

I'm just going on your past history of negativity. You reap what you sow.

What are you even talking about?

If you want to start discussing the Cowboys then I am all ears. Something tells me you are better off talking to a happy fan like yourself who comes to a message board to to have other fans give you comforting back rubs and tell you everything will be ok.

 

[risco]

Yah, you Murray guys continue to gloss over the cost of retaining Murray. And you also gloss over the fact that they replaced him with NO ONE. And to say, who cares about the cost is irresponsible. No question that Murray is way better than anyone we have now. Remains to be seen how good Michaels is, but he is no Murray I am assuming.

The biggest issue was that they didnt take anyone in the draft or sign anyone of quality to replace him. Had they done that, which they will do next year, then we wouldnt even be having this conversation.

If a frog had a glass butt it burst every time it hops. Listen, we don't have time to be waiting until next year... Some players you have to sacrifice things to keep them. DM is one of those players. And none of know the actual cap situation.

 

[superonyx]

The world isnt a Dallas Cowboys bubble. There are other backs, both in college and in the pros besides Murray and the cast offs we have now. Murray is only part of the issue. NOT replacing him with quality is even more of the issue. Murray is a good back, but not worth the contract he got. And yes, guys like Crawford and the Kraken all got Murray money. Money much better spent then on Murray. You can see quite clearly that Murray isnt the all world back some thought he was. He is having a marginal season in Philly. He is a certain style back. So some may say he was the perfect fit. His style was a great fit, they just neglected to find a similar back with that style. We also saw where a Dunbar type was also a great fit here. Murray has NO Dunbar in him.

Well the good thing is we could have had all 3 guys. We paid Crawford early for potential we don't know he will ever hit. He wasn't a free agent.

I'm fully aware there are other backs. I agree with you that we did a poor job of replacing Murray. I am not against the decision to not give Murray the money if there is a real solid successful plan to replace him. I'm not fine with using money to justify letting Murray go, replacing him with backup level players, and then using the money on a player who honestly has not deserved it. (Crawford).

The running situation doesn't automatically improve with Romo back in a month. We couldn't run against the Giants or Eagles with Romo. Our backs are just a level below what we need. The reason so many fans are pushing for Michael has less to do with Michael and more to do with our lack of confidence in what we have if he doesn't help us.

 

[CowboyRoy]

2014 and 2015 Murray I don't think there is a difference. He is being nailed in the back field almost at the point of handoff in Philly. No one is running with the scheme Kelly is using. In Dallas often he was in the I formation in Philly he is not.

I grant you teams are stacking the line with Romo out but I think Murray in this offense could still hammer those 4 yard pickups on a consistent bases and a reason why we are about to see CMike take over because he will hammer the line not bounce around. Randle is great with a hole he can't do jack in terms of hitting the line hard and moving the pile.

Romo and Dez being out together is 100% the biggest problem in the run game. With no deep threat or a threat to pass they are completely stacking the line. That will shut down ANY running game.

Here is the order of why the Dallas run game has been so bad. IMHO

1. Romo and Dez being injured
2. We brought no one of quality in the draft or via FA to run the ball
3. Murray is no longer running the ball
4. They havent tried Michaels yet
5. We miss our OL coach
6. The Oline

 

[CowboyRoy]

If a frog had a glass butt it burst every time it hops. Listen, we don't have time to be waiting until next year... Some players you have to sacrifice things to keep them. DM is one of those players. And none of know the actual cap situation.

Again, I dont agree on that . Murray is a good back, but can be replaced for much cheaper. Wait till you see what defense is going to be capable of in the next few games and you may change your mind on that Murray money.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Well the good thing is we could have had all 3 guys. We paid Crawford early for potential we don't know he will ever hit. He wasn't a free agent.

I'm fully aware there are other backs. I agree with you that we did a poor job of replacing Murray. I am not against the decision to not give Murray the money if there is a real solid successful plan to replace him. I'm not fine with using money to justify letting Murray go, replacing him with backup level players, and then using the money on a player who honestly has not deserved it. (Crawford).

The running situation doesn't automatically improve with Romo back in a month. We couldn't run against the Giants or Eagles with Romo. Our backs are just a level below what we need. The reason so many fans are pushing for Michael has less to do with Michael and more to do with our lack of confidence in what we have if he doesn't help us.

I agree on most of that. Letting Murray go was great if they were going to find someone else. If they McChicken was going to replace Murray, they are idiots.

Wait on Michaels. You may be suprised.

You also seem to highly discount the loss of Romo and Dez. Once game against the Giants doesnt make it policy.

 

[Rockport]

Romo and Dez being out together is 100% the biggest problem in the run game. With no deep threat or a threat to pass they are completely stacking the line. That will shut down ANY running game.

Here is the order of why the Dallas run game has been so bad. IMHO

1. Romo and Dez being injured
2. We brought no one of quality in the draft or via FA to run the ball
3. Murray is no longer running the ball
4. They havent tried Michaels yet
5. We miss our OL coach
6. The Oline

High up there should be the fact that our outside WR's can't win 1-1 against the CB's.

 

[John813]

I believe not paying Murray send a bad message to the rest of the team. It tells them the team will run you to the ground and then use that as an excuse to not compensate you for your contribution.

If anything overpaying for Crawford tells the lockeroom that you need to flash a little potential and then demand a huge contract BEFORE you actually produce anything.

While I was ok in letting Murray go, due to the contract he signed with the Eagles, that is a good point.
The argument could be that Murray could of been over-run/over used last year and could start declining this year, which may be a valid claim.

I do wonder how players like Dez and Romo felt when the Cowboys were playing hard ball with Murray, after the season they had.
Bet Dez would of bounced if the Cowboys didn't franchise tag him and low balled him on the Guaranteed money. Who knows, maybe if we offered a better deal to Murray before he hit FA, maybe 6ish million a year could of re-signed him. The Eagles weren't interested till Bradford wanted to be re-united with Murray IIRC.

Signing a guy like Crawford to his big deal, before he truly broke out, reminds me of Ratliff, who was a steal on his first extension, but then also guys like Hamlin, Roy Williams(WR) and other guys we gave big deals to without seeing them be great for us.

 

[Doomsday101]

While I was ok in letting Murray go, due to the contract he signed with the Eagles, that is a good point.
The argument could be that Murray could of been over-run/over used last year and could start declining this year, which may be a valid claim.

I do wonder how players like Dez and Romo felt when the Cowboys were playing hard ball with Murray, after the season they had.
Bet Dez would of bounced if the Cowboys didn't franchise tag him and low balled him on the Guaranteed money. Who knows, maybe if we offered a better deal to Murray before he hit FA, maybe 6ish million a year could of re-signed him. The Eagles weren't interested till Bradford wanted to be re-united with Murray IIRC.

Signing a guy like Crawford to his big deal, before he truly broke out, reminds me of Ratliff, who was a steal on his first extension, but then also guys like Hamlin, Roy Williams(WR) and other guys we gave big deals to without seeing them be great for us.

It is a vaild claim that he was over used and that is why Murray is struggling that is until you watch Philly and the reality is the RB are getting nailed in the back field. No one is running very well in Philly. They took him out of the I formation where he was having great success and putting him in this NCAA offense of Kelly.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Its pretty simple stuff. Murray is injury prone and had one great year. He wanted a 5 year deal worth 8 million per year. Ok, goodbye. His production could be replaced. They were just idiots in who they replaced him with. Dunbar is a perfect example. The guys was knocking it out of the park nearly 100 yards a game receiving. But again, he was injury prone and got hurt.

3 Tech Defensive tackle is apparently the key to this defense. And Crawford is a very good player. Just because some less than knowledgeable fans think you only judge a DL by sacks, doesnt mean the guy isnt playing well. Murray is also 28 and will be over 30 for part of the contract. Do we need an education on RB's over 30? How about an education on RB that run the ball 400 times and their effectiveness the next season?

What is Murray doing in Philly? So Murray has had one great season out of 5 years in the NFL? And it was because he finally stayed healthy and got the ball 30 times a game. Do any of you have the redzone channel? Do you watch any other teams play? Play Fantasy Football? There are many good backs all around the league. Most are NOT getting 8 million per year. The position doesnt warrant it for the most part. Simple math, simple football 101 stuff.

If anything, you should be thanking the Brass for not falling into the desperate trap they always fell into in the past.

And do ANY of you realize that Romo got hurt and Dez got hurt? This year is all but toast. We can be thanking our lucky stars would didnt overpay for Murray.

 

[CowboyRoy]

It is a vaild claim that he was over used and that is why Murray is struggling that is until you watch Philly and the reality is the RB are getting nailed in the back field. No one is running very well in Philly. They took him out of the I formation where he was having great success and putting him in this NCAA offense of Kelly.

Bottom line is that it was Murray that was greedy and chose the money over the Cowboys. If he had accepted 3 years for 5 million per season this would all be fine. He wanted to get over paid with a huge contract. Cant blame him, but dont blame the Cowboys. They did the prudent, smart thing.

 

[lostar2009]

1. Murray of 2015 is not Murray of 2014.

2. The Cowboys blocking of 2015 is not close to the level of the blocking in 2014.

3. In 2015 defenses are loading up against the run because Romo and Dez are out. In 2014 the Cowboys had a very dangerous passing attack that kept defenses from loading up against the run. Defenses double covered Dez in 2014 but in 2015 that extra defender is being used to defend the run.

4. Stats show that the history of RBs with over 370 carries in a season is not good in following seasons. Almost all fall off the next season and most never recover.

5. Stats show that starting RBs start to decline at age 27.

Murray look fine Monday when they gave him his +20 carries and killed the rb by committee bs.