If the Running Back Issue Isn't a Problem

[5Stars]

No.............no team in NFL history ever let the rushing champion walk out the door. Murray will be the first rushing champion to defend his title on another team.

The Cowboys will rush for more yards than the eagles this season.

 

[sbark]

Unlike in in the NFL, the last thing I do with college players is go by their stats, unless it's something remarkable. I go by how much it seems as though their skillsets or lack thereof will translate in the NFL. I put Randle in a group with a player like Jeremy Langford.

..........but now with a 2 yr headstart

 

[Knotamus]

No.............no team in NFL history ever let the rushing champion walk out the door. Murray will be the first rushing champion to defend his title on another team.

yeah. yeah. He wasn't the first player AND nor will he be the last player to have a great season during his contract year.... go figure.

 

[Beast_from_East]

yeah. yeah. He wasn't the first player AND nor will he be the last player to have a great season during his contract year.... go figure.

I agree, players always have their best seasons during a contract year on average...............but that doesn't change that fact that Murray is the first rushing champion to change teams.

 

[mattjames2010]

..........but now with a 2 yr headstart

Yeah, with an awful rookie season and a backup role in 2014. Pretty much what I expected.

 

[DFWJC]

Listed below is the last 10 Super Bowl winners. Not one time does the winner have a top 5 running back in yards and only twice a top 10. Five times their leading rusher was out of the top 20.

*New England won the Super Bowl last year. Their leading rusher was Jonas Gray with 412 yards. He was 47th in rushing. There were 4 QB's with more rushing yards then him.

*Seattle won the Super Bowl in 2014. Lynch rushed for 1300 yards. He was 6th in rushing.

*Baltimore won the Super Bowl in 2013. Rice rushed for 1100 yards. He was 11th in rushing.

*Giants won in 2012. Bradshaw rushed for 659 yards. He was 29th in rushing.

*Green Bay won in 2011. Brandon Jackson was their leading rusher at 703 yards. Aaron Rogers was the next leading rusher at 356. He was 32nd in rushing.

*Saints in 2010. Thomas rushed for 793. #24

*Steelers 2009. Parker 791. #26

*Giants 2008. Jacobs 1009. #15

*Colts 2007. Addai 1081. #18

*Steelers 2006. Parker 1202. #12


So in analyzing these numbers, it looks like 8 of these teams could have had a better running back and at least 5 of them had major issues at running back. But still, they won the Super Bowl.

I'm analytical by profession and I know for a fact that no one on this message board has enough, if any analytical data and access to pro scouts that has honed their skills to form an educated opinion on whether the Cowboys needed to draft a RB over Randy or Chaz at their prospected positions at the time they were drafted or if they needed to draft a RB at all.

I will tend to put my trust in the professionals at valley Ranch over internet scouts and GM's.

I believe in Will McClay and what he has done over the last few years.

That's amazing.
This should be national news to quiet the panicking

 

[jnday]

Good questions....but, all this vetching about losing Murray is getting ridiculous. You, me, and the Pope have no idea about the running back position as it stands right now. But....oh no....the Big Bad Murray is gone! Let me cry...please let me cry...and if I cry louder maybe, just maybe, Jerry will bring him back in a trade to Philly...then I can sleep tonght...with my eyes finally dry and closed.

You are the one that keeps bringing Murray up in the conversation. Everybody else is worried about his replacement , just as you should . This defense is not that much improved to be exposed game after game. In a couple of years, maybe. A couple rookies does not make for much improvement until they learn the pro game . Murray is gone, good for him. Now it is time to find a RB that can carry the load. Nobody gives a crap about Murray if a quality RB is added to the roster.

 

[Bleu Star]

My personal goal for Dallas is to win back-to-back before the drought when Romo leaves.

I don't like the replacement. Or relying on unproven talent, in a year we should be pushing for the Super Bowl. ohh sure, were going to win the NFCE.

But can we beat Seattle, GB, playoff teams?

And to disegard the RB position, after the Running Game, got us into the playoffs and competitive with the best teams in the league, since..................2 decades ago, is going to be a topic! How could it not be?

I like watching the Cowboys win in the playoffs.

And, the formula worked last year. Yes, the D should be in approved greatly. But I wouldn't bank on that. I would bank on the running game. And no, I don't think our line is so good, we can put anybody back there. And why would we want to even "test that out"? In a season we should be pushing.......

Yep.............

 

[jnday]

That's amazing.
This should be national news to quiet the panicking

Not the first one of those teams are the Cowboys, with Cowboy players and the Cowboy smashmouth running game which makes the team click.

 

[Bleu Star]

Good questions....but, all this vetching about losing Murray is getting ridiculous. You, me, and the Pope have no idea about the running back position as it stands right now. But....oh no....the Big Bad Murray is gone! Let me cry...please let me cry...and if I cry louder maybe, just maybe, Jerry will bring him back in a trade to Philly...then I can sleep tonght...with my eyes finally dry and closed.

I know you get it and you're just doing this to prepare for your test.

No one is bent about the impossible (getting Demarco back....). People are bent about moving away from a proven strategy one year removed from a 12-4 season that saw us put teams to sleep by controlling the clock on offense. Everyone keeps talking about getting #6. It's kinda strange that we found the formula and are now content with going to a RBC setup with largely unproven players at a position that matters. We have 2 years. Let me say once more. We have 2 years before Romo is DONE. Now is not the time to experiment.

 

[Beast_from_East]

You are the one that keeps bringing Murray up in the conversation. Everybody else is worried about his replacement , just as you should . This defense is not that much improved to be exposed game after game. In a couple of years, maybe. A couple rookies does not make for much improvement until they learn the pro game . Murray is gone, good for him. Now it is time to find a RB that can carry the load. Nobody gives a crap about Murray if a quality RB is added to the roster.

Exactly...............the issue is not about Murray, the issue is about how are we going to replace his production.

Some seen to think the replacements don't matter because it was all the oline while others think McFadden and Randle can handle the job, while others think this is one gigantic blunder.

 

[Bleu Star]

You are the one that keeps bringing Murray up in the conversation. Everybody else is worried about his replacement , just as you should . This defense is not that much improved to be exposed game after game. In a couple of years, maybe. A couple rookies does not make for much improvement until they learn the pro game . Murray is gone, good for him. Now it is time to find a RB that can carry the load. Nobody gives a crap about Murray if a quality RB is added to the roster.

Yep.........

 

[Beast_from_East]

I know you get it and you're just doing this to prepare for your test.

No one is bent about the impossible (getting Demarco back....). People are bent about moving away from a proven strategy one year removed from a 12-4 season that saw us put teams to sleep by controlling the clock on offense. Everyone keeps talking about getting #6. It's kinda strange that we found the formula and are now content with going to a RBC setup with largely unproven players at a position that matters. We have 2 years. Let me say once more. We have 2 years before Romo is DONE. Now is not the time to experiment.

Well said bro.................I don't understand it either why the team wants to completely change the formula that worked last year.............huge gamble on their part.

 

[Bleu Star]

You took a huge swing and missed. If there was any doubt. This post removed it.
Your response had no bearing on my post.

Ok dude. It's your world.

 

[Bleu Star]

Well said bro.................I don't understand it either why the team wants to completely change the formula that worked last year.............huge gamble on their part.

It's a major gamble that just may work. But calling those that question it every name in the book is.. well.. juvenile.

 

[Moderately_Askew]

I know you get it and you're just doing this to prepare for your test.

No one is bent about the impossible (getting Demarco back....). People are bent about moving away from a proven strategy one year removed from a 12-4 season that saw us put teams to sleep by controlling the clock on offense. Everyone keeps talking about getting #6. It's kinda strange that we found the formula and are now content with going to a RBC setup with largely unproven players at a position that matters. We have 2 years. Let me say once more. We have 2 years before Romo is DONE. Now is not the time to experiment.

Provide the link where the team acknowledges they are moving away from a proven strategy, if anything they are moving towards that strategy this year with the RBC. The team should have spread around the carries last year to keep Murray fresh during that final quarter of the season. The argument in the preseason for Murray last year was that he was injury prone and unproven and with one healthy-ish year he is now indispensable. I know this is very unpopular to some on the board, but the coaching staff is happy with what they have at RB for the moment. They are going to spread the ball around and the OL will open up huge lanes for them to run through.

It is good to know you can see into the future and can tell us Romo's career shelf life.

 

[Clove]

Listed below is the last 10 Super Bowl winners. Not one time does the winner have a top 5 running back in yards and only twice a top 10. Five times their leading rusher was out of the top 20.

*New England won the Super Bowl last year. Their leading rusher was Jonas Gray with 412 yards. He was 47th in rushing. There were 4 QB's with more rushing yards then him.

*Seattle won the Super Bowl in 2014. Lynch rushed for 1300 yards. He was 6th in rushing.

*Baltimore won the Super Bowl in 2013. Rice rushed for 1100 yards. He was 11th in rushing.

*Giants won in 2012. Bradshaw rushed for 659 yards. He was 29th in rushing.

*Green Bay won in 2011. Brandon Jackson was their leading rusher at 703 yards. Aaron Rogers was the next leading rusher at 356. He was 32nd in rushing.

*Saints in 2010. Thomas rushed for 793. #24

*Steelers 2009. Parker 791. #26

*Giants 2008. Jacobs 1009. #15

*Colts 2007. Addai 1081. #18

*Steelers 2006. Parker 1202. #12


So in analyzing these numbers, it looks like 8 of these teams could have had a better running back and at least 5 of them had major issues at running back. But still, they won the Super Bowl.

I'm analytical by profession and I know for a fact that no one on this message board has enough, if any analytical data and access to pro scouts that has honed their skills to form an educated opinion on whether the Cowboys needed to draft a RB over Randy or Chaz at their prospected positions at the time they were drafted or if they needed to draft a RB at all.

I will tend to put my trust in the professionals at valley Ranch over internet scouts and GM's.

I believe in Will McClay and what he has done over the last few years.

What we do know is that we can't win without great run production.

 

[Clove]

No one said it wasn't a concern. The decision to not sign Murray at that price was the correct decision. Our biggest concern is not offense but rather defense. You can't over pay for a one year wonder player and manage the cap.

Overall the Jerry's team has been spot on! Hopefully adding a RB without sacrificing the future can be accomplished. No more M Barber deals or Roy Williams trade please

The deals didn't screw us, the deal for guys with no talent did. It's alright to spend as long as the talent is there. But hey, RBC, or any one of 500 players can be QB or any 500 players can run behind this line, I guess we shall see.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Provide the link where the team acknowledges they are moving away from a proven strategy, if anything they are moving towards that strategy this year with the RBC. The team should have spread around the carries last year to keep Murray fresh during that final quarter of the season. The argument in the preseason for Murray last year was that he was injury prone and unproven and with one healthy-ish year he is now indispensable. I know this is very unpopular to some on the board, but the coaching staff is happy with what they have at RB for the moment. They are going to spread the ball around and the OL will open up huge lanes for them to run through.

It is good to know you can see into the future and can tell us Romo's career shelf life.

It's good to know you know what the coaches really think.

And for those who suggest this team has been doing business like this and citing other positions and how they have rotated people out, I give you Dez. Skill positions are the expensive positions and linemen and such are where you save money.

Hence ehat the team did when they held their water and got a DE and a G on the cheap that both were considered top 20.

The argument before the draft by those who think Murray wasn't all that is Dallas will fill that void with a rookie. They didn't.

But they did keep the players who have amassed less than 1100 yards in their entire careers and a cast off considered a bust.

There was a reason this team was 12-4. MUrray and the running game was a huge part of that.

 

[DFWJC]

I'm not sure why several of you think we're all of a sudden going to abandon the run. Comments saying we are abandoning what was working or what is tried and true...they're off base and unsubstantiated.
What has anyone in the organization said that would make you draw that conclusion?