The only issue is that the league rules changed since those 90s teams and it would be foolish not to take advantage of those rule changes that favor throwing the football.
As for why they were so committed to running against stacked boxes I can only assume it was to protect the defense by eating up clock and limiting the amount of plays they had to defend against. It surely was not done to improve offensive output. The only reason we got away with it is because of how well Romo and the passing offense performed on 2nd and 3rd down. Much of the time in the second half of the season we were facing long 2nd and 3rd downs because of diminished production from running on 1st down.
The league rules do favor passing the ball, but passing the ball doesn't necessarily favor our Cowboys and, in particular, Tony Romo. The Cowboys pounded the rock for a litany of reasons, though, limiting the defense exposure to the field was a big part of the game plan, and my guess is, it will still be. The Cowboys may see a slight improvement in pass rush (particularly once Hardy can play), but I doubt it will be to the extent that the Cowboys will want to lean on them alla Parcels. Byron Jones is still a rookie and the Cowboys still have quite a few questions to answer in the secondary and linebacking crew. The Cowboys also pounded the rock to protect Romo from exposure to potential injury. The Cowboys also pounded the rock to open up passing lanes and make the playaction effective. The reasons for running the football go on and on and on,...especially for team that was built with that idea in mind. While your blueprint for success does make some sense for certain football teams, I'm afraid it makes no sense whatsoever for the Cowboys, especially when you consider that Garrett insist they intend to continue to place a heavy emphasis on running the ball.
I am not sure why they didn't run the other RBs more last year. I think Dunbar was the change of pace back but maybe they didn't trust him to protect Romo. As far as Randle, he was very productive but had the underwear incident and also fumbled twice. I think it was a big mistake not to take some of the burden off of Murray and perhaps they have learned their lesson here. Emmitt was a rare breed in that he could take all that punishment all-year and still be going strong late into the playoffs. Murray obviously can't do it. I think Jason learned his lesson - there will only be one Emmitt Smith and you can't design your team waiting for the second coming.
I struggle buying this too. Of course Demarco isn't Emmitt Smith. There is no way I will every believe that ivy-league educated Jason Garrett thought he had Emmitt Smith with Demarco. The reason Demarco was ran into the ground last year in my opinion was all about trust. They trusted Demarco to get that 1 yard. They trusted Demarco to pick up the blitz. So on and so on. The other side of that trustfest for Demarco is the fact that he was apparently the only running back they trusted to be consistent in his production; what does that tell you about JoRan and Dunbar?
I am quite skeptical about Ryan Williams ability to stay healthy and about DMac being able to run the ball effectively in the NFL. I think Randle is good but worry about the fumbles. You have to remember despite where he was drafted the Cowboys put a 3rd round grade on him in the 2013 draft and it unlikely any of the RBs we could draft in the 3rd round this year were rated higher. Randle has also shown the ability to run in the NFL so he is de-risked from that POV. As for earlier draft choices Jones was clearly way ahead any of the RBs left when we were on the clock and fills a huge need. Gregory is a smart kid who we had as #4 on the whole draft board when we were picking at #60. We have had success in the past supporting players with off the field issues and it sounds like we are implementing a program for Gregory to be successful. You can only judge picks by the information that was available on the day of the draft and I think it is hard to argue a RB should have been taken in those slots. As for the 3rd round choice, OT was a big hole at the time and arguably bigger than the one at RB given Free's health. They picked a guy who they think had early 2nd round type ability who has had some injury issues. My guess is the RBs left on the board were not deemed to be better than Randle, Williams or DMac.
I said earlier I understood the moves the Cowboys made at #1 and #2. I doubt if there was a single running back left to be drafted that were rated higher than Jones and/or Gregory on any scouts or teams or expert's draft board. Having said that, both could still be described as a gamble. Byron Jones wasn't even in the first round conversation until after the combine. That can be disconcerting as he very well could be a gifted athlete who is only that. The gamble on Gregory is obvious. He is absolutely no use to the Cowboys if he can't pass a drug test and/or stay out of trouble that could lead to suspension.
As for suggesting that OT was a bigger hole than RB, that is a matter of opinion. While Free's health could be a concern, he is at least a viable starter. The Cowboys have no idea if they even have that in their current group of running backs.
The argument is actually quite simple. We won last year mostly because of Romo's performance. We saw how the team performed with Romo out and we also saw Romo put up big performances with Murray hobbled with the hand injury. This team goes as Romo goes and we were actually putting Romo in many disadvantageous situations last year by trying to run into a brick wall to limit the snaps the defense would have to play. Now this year with an improved defense we can run the offense to maximize offensive production instead of for limiting defensive snaps. This means probably passing 52-55% of the snaps as is the case with most balanced offenses in the league. When teams overplay the run on 1st and 2nd down we will probably throw more and attempt to build early leads in the process. Once the lead is secured we have the pass rushers that can terrorize QBs leading to strips sacks and INTs. Once you make the opposition 1-dimensional they are easier to defend.
I'll buy that the defense has improved...but not by much and certainly not by enough that the Cowboys should adopt a completely different model that leans on them. The Cowboys defense was made better last year by the running game. And sure, the entire team benefited from Romo being Romo, but understand the running game and the passing game has a symbiotic relationship. The running game is improved by the threat of Romo going deep. The pass is improved by the threat of the run. If the Cowboys of a sudden veer from the tried and true method they implemented last year, not only will the run suffer, but so will the pass, and so will the defense and so will us fans...and visa versa.
