If the Running Back Issue Isn't a Problem

[MichaelWinicki]

...and let me add this.

The Jets was the 3rd best running team last year. Right behind the Cowboys with a 4.5 rushing average and a total of 2280. The Boys averaged 4.6 with a total of 2354. Just 74 more yards. And who is running the ball in New York? They run a RBBC approach and the results are very comparable if not identical.

All this stat research got me to thinking.

Joseph Randle had a 6.7 average on only 51 carries. That is not a large enough sample rate to get excited about. So I went back and watched the video that "itsaboat" posted of Randle's runs last year. That video blow me away of what was happening. And what I seen is exactly what the Cowboys must be thinking.

Teams are scared of our rushing attack. Just go watch the video again everyone. In that video, Joseph "freaking" Randle was facing 8 man fronts on approximately 80% of the plays. Not just one team, but every team in that video. Washington, Philly, Houston, Jacksonville, the "Big Bad Bully" Seattle and so on. Eighty percent!

You're absolutely right.

Ivory and Johnson leading the way.

I honestly think some believe that a "real good" back will get about 4.6 YPC and everyone gets about 2.3 YPC. And that there are only about 6 "real good" backs out there.

Non-sense.

There will be a back who emerges out of the "fab-four" who get 250 carries and will average at least 4.5 YPC. Maybe Randle. Maybe McFadden. Maybe Williams.

But someone will.

 

[darthseinfeld]

Not so much the size as it is the style and overall ability. He is a quicker back that thrives when the defense has been battered. I dont think he runs with enough power and isnt elusive enough with a defense keying on him. I think he is good auxiliary HB, but I think if you ask him to be the main guy you are going to get Troy Hambrick like results

I dont see the other backs on the roster as worthy of carries. McFadden has value as a 3rd down back, but his days if being effective with significant carries are over. Dunbar is a niche player who is too deficient at too many things to be counted on. Ryan Williams is intriguing but he is still a flier who hasnt had any success in the NFL, is injury prone and wasn't good enough for the 53 last year. Like Dunbar there are deficiencies that are going to limit his usage, and as a runner he is somewhat redundant with Randle. Like Randle, he isnt that "dirty yards" guy the organization has been talking about.

I would be very surprised if they dont add a guy between now and TC. Do they need to be better then Randle. Not really, but if they want to do a commitee, you are missing key parts to what the offense will need to function. However I think their lack of trust in Randle off the field could have them looking at players clearly better then him like Miller and Mason.

As far as the draft. All the guys from Gurley to Duke Johnson ( with the exception of David) would have probably opened camp the starter. Beyond that, Langford is kind of redundant with Randle. He would have been kind of pointless. If hes better,its not by much. Buck Allen, I think would have beaten Randle out for the starting job, but that because he is more complete runner. Jack of all master of none. Behind Allen, Randle gets significant carried. Mike Davis is a feast or famine pick at HB. He could beat out Randle by miles, or he could get cut

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Yeah, there was some suckage there and elsewhere with that regime and another. Bad trades. Etc.

Some bad luck too.

Rivera falling on the freaking treadmill and ruining his back.

Young having all sorts of knee problems.

 

[jobberone]

First let me say you gave a very good response.

But no I didn't miss the point. Running Back is the question here by the OP. I supplied fact that you don't need a top RB to win the Super Bowl. But I do agree with you that with our current team we need a very effective rushing attack to be successful. And I believe that this offensive line will provide a very good rushing attack through a RBBC approach. As it stands, the Cowboys must feel that way also.

Instead of selecting a RB in the draft, the Cowboys think they have upgraded our defense. If Gregory and Jones plays better that their prospective positions then who played there last year, I believe we will be better then choosing one of the RB's. Just my opinion.

As you listed it seems that every Super Bowl winner wins for many deferent reason. From great QB play to great defenses. From getting hot at the right time to just having good old luck.

By the way, your wrong about the Saints defense. The year they won their defense was 25th in total (yards) and 20th in points. That is pretty pedestrian.

Nice response

 

[Corso]

Should I get you a tissue and your binkie?

So ironic...

 

[wileedog]

First let me say you gave a very good response.

To a good post.

But no I didn't miss the point. Running Back is the question here by the OP. I supplied fact that you don't need a top RB to win the Super Bowl. But I do agree with you that with our current team we need a very effective rushing attack to be successful. And I believe that this offensive line will provide a very good rushing attack through a RBBC approach. As it stands, the Cowboys must feel that way also.

And I guess the point some of us are making, including the OP, is that we don't necessarily agree. There is some serious dice throwing going on here with a guy who has been useless for 3 years and 3 other guys who have never really done anything on this level.

Instead of selecting a RB in the draft, the Cowboys think they have upgraded our defense. If Gregory and Jones plays better that their prospective positions then who played there last year, I believe we will be better then choosing one of the RB's. Just my opinion.

And I get the need to upgrade the D. But rookies, especially pass-rushers, rarely make huge impacts their first season, and even Lawrence doesn't have a full season under his belt either. At this point we might miss Hardy for over half the season, and we still have big question marks up the middle with some pedestrian DTs and LBs with health issues. The secondary is far from solid even if Jones impresses out of the gate.

As you listed it seems that every Super Bowl winner wins for many deferent reason. From great QB play to great defenses. From getting hot at the right time to just having good old luck.

Which is why the point is to maximize your odds in the offseason. Even if the plan was to draft BPA no matter what then they should have covered themselves better with a proven commodity free agent beforehand like Gore or Ingram IMO. Randle, Williams or McFadden MAY have bigger upsides than these guys, but they sure have much bigger downsides and risk.

As I mentioned before, the team needed a DT in the draft too but didn't address that position either. However the team as built can probably muddle through with what he have. I'm not sure we can say that about the RB position.

By the way, your wrong about the Saints defense. The year they won their defense was 25th in total (yards) and 20th in points. That is pretty pedestrian.

Yeah my bad I was looking at their 2010 regular season, not 2009. OTOH they did have the No.1 offense that year with Brees throwing for 4400 and having a 109 QB rating, so there you go.

 

[jobberone]

You're absolutely right.

Ivory and Johnson leading the way.

I honestly think some believe that a "real good" back will get about 4.6 YPC and everyone gets about 2.3 YPC. And that there are only about 6 "real good" backs out there.

Non-sense.

There will be a back who emerges out of the "fab-four" who get 250 carries and will average at least 4.5 YPC. Maybe Randle. Maybe McFadden. Maybe Williams.
But someone will.

Agreed and significantly more probable than not

people can debate with good points on both sides. Boils down to effective rush or not. And it's not all or nothing but a spectrum.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I'm fine...thanks. You use them.

Don't need them, Chief.

 

[5Stars]

Don't need them, Chief.

You could have fooled me....and a lot of other posters! lol

 

[Fletch]

Seems like the mediots are driving this narrative more than anything else...

And the fans gobble up the tripe. It's always happening. Media merely herding the sheep.

 

[TwoDeep3]

until defense can get up to speed and the moving parts are ay maximum production, without injury - Lee, McClain - then one might make the case the defense still needs to be protected by the offense.

Without a stout running attack that can move the chains on third down, and create the need to put eight in the box, this leaves Romo again carrying the team.

I love Romo. But why would you EVER try fixing something that was not broken? Or change the dynamics which might put pressure on the defense it was protected against by a running game last year.

I see a lot of people get defensive about these questions. I see few if any that are giving any answers.

 

[wileedog]

...and let me add this.

The Jets was the 3rd best running team last year. Right behind the Cowboys with a 4.5 rushing average and a total of 2280. The Boys averaged 4.6 with a total of 2354. Just 74 more yards. And who is running the ball in New York? They run a RBBC approach and the results are very comparable if not identical.

All this stat research got me to thinking.

Joseph Randle had a 6.7 average on only 51 carries. That is not a large enough sample rate to get excited about. So I went back and watched the video that "itsaboat" posted of Randle's runs last year. That video blow me away of what was happening. And what I seen is exactly what the Cowboys must be thinking.

Teams are scared of our rushing attack. Just go watch the video again everyone. In that video, Joseph "freaking" Randle was facing 8 man fronts on approximately 80% of the plays. Not just one team, but every team in that video. Washington, Philly, Houston, Jacksonville, the "Big Bad Bully" Seattle and so on. Eighty percent!

I wasn't as blown away by the Randle video as some, but I admit that might be my own bias shading my opinion. And like you said sample size still means something. Can he do that carrying the ball 15-20 times a game? Can he do it against teams who haven't been getting pounded by Murray for 45 minutes before he got in the game? What happens when teams are specifically studying film on him the entire week prior to the game, and not Murray?

He also fumbled twice in 51 carries. If that becomes a problem....

We shall see, and hopefully we make a move for another vet of some kind, I will feel better about it. Wish camp started tomorrow...

 

[jobberone]

Let's keep it civil people.

 

[5Stars]

until defense can get up to speed and the moving parts are ay maximum production, without injury - Lee, McClain - then one might make the case the defense still needs to be protected by the offense.

Without a stout running attack that can move the chains on third down, and create the need to put eight in the box, this leaves Romo again carrying the team.

I love Romo. But why would you EVER try fixing something that was not broken? Or change the dynamics which might put pressure on the defense it was protected against by a running game last year.

I see a lot of people get defensive about these questions. I see few if any that are giving any answers.

Dude...listen...MURRAY CHOSE TO LEAVE FOR MORE MONEY! Good god man, wake up!

The Cowboys made an offer of 6 million to him....he did not want it, so he moved on. And now, you say the Cowboys broke the team by not paying more than what they wanted to afford considering other team needs!

IT WAS MURRAY'S DECISION TO LEAVE! GET OVER IT! The Cowboys are better off on defense because they could afford some help with the extra money that Murray wanted. You are either thick or just like to start arguments about something that cannot be taken back. Stop crying over spilled milk....wake up.

 

[sbark]

I wouldn't have been happy. Randle didn't look impressive in college and looked like a late round/undrafted RB, in my eyes.

OK, so who were you wishing for in this years draft? Randles college stats compare favorably vrs for example TJ Yeldon who was a 2nd rounder. A few less yards rushing, double the receptions, a few more TD's........

Id agree, his 1st year in the NFL, he was a UDFA look alike, but gotta say last year looked the part.
****
I'm looking at its between Ryan W and Randle, MacFadden replaces everything Dunbar gives us, with the dual threat on 3rd downs---Teams knew a screen etc was coming with just Dunbar in the game and they took it away. I'd say if Days can show us something for a shortyardage, thumper, and some of a blocker, some hands, some special teams--he has a place.

 

[jobberone]

OK, so who were you wishing for in this years draft? Randles college stats compare favorably vrs for example TJ Yeldon who was a 2nd rounder. A few less yards rushing, double the receptions, a few more TD's........

Id agree, his 1st year in the NFL, he was a UDFA look alike, but gotta say last year looked the part.

Give me that truck!

 

[sbark]

Give me that truck!

is the check in the mail?

 

[Yakuza Rich]

The media always speculates when it come to the Cowboys. As Rick Reilly and Peter King have said, when in doubt...write about the Cowboys.





YR

 

[MichaelWinicki]

If the defense escapes major injury to one of the starters during training camp, then I think it is beyond needing to be "protected" by the offense. The linebacking corps is very solid. The DE's are potentially very good. The secondary is ho-hum as are the DT's.

Overall potentially the best defense since 2009.

Not a top 5 defense, but certainly capable of being in the top-10.

 

[5Stars]

Why are you yelling? Are you going to threaten me like you did before? Or will you get embarrassed again and leave for three weeks?

I'm not going to fall for deflection....carry on. smh