Is Murray on an unsustainable pace?

[CATCH17]

You are being delusional now. None of our backs, other than Murray, has even had a 100 yard game, never mind a 200 yard game, even more the franchise record for most yards in a game prevously set by rushing champion of all time, ROH & HOFer, Emmitt Smith. No one knows if either guy can hold up or even sustain 10 carries a game, let alone how they will produce. Not one back other than Murray is trusted to carry on 3rd and short, for a very good reason. The Cowboys know they have a special back in Murray, it is undeniable.

Let's not confuse a 38 yard run for anything more than it was. Very nice, but not Jim Brown kind of nice. Huge diffence people.

I'm not delusional at all.

Demarco Murray is more physically gifted than anyone on this roster by a mile.

But I believe that if you give Joseph Randle or Ryan Williams the amount of carries Demarco is getting that they could get similar production.


And as good as Emmitt's Oline was Emmitt is still superior to Demarco in just about every category except maybe top speed.

 

[BAT]

I'm not delusional at all.

Demarco Murray is more physically gifted than anyone on this roster by a mile.

But I believe that if you give Joseph Randle or Ryan Williams the amount of carries Demarco is getting that they could get similar production.


And as good as Emmitt's Oline was Emmitt is still superior to Demarco in just about every category except maybe top speed.

C'mon Catch, really? The caveat "similar" was a nice touch but vague as heck. I know you don't think either Randle or Dunbar could produce the HISTORIC results that Murray has as a rusher, no sane person would. But if Murray is not producing at a historic level, do the Cowboys still win? Plus Murray is doing more than just rushing at a historic pace, his touches, moreso his involvement in almost every offensive play not the least of which, pass protecting, is just as crucial to Cowboys success.

"Similar" production is a copout, and you know it. We do not know what COULD have happened with a RB other than Murray, that is abject speculation without a shred of basis (neither Randle or Dunbar have done anything in their past to suggest all the confidence the anti-Murray contingent are slinging). Randle's YPC is an extremely small sample size and extrapolating it to a full game with as many touches that Murray gets is a formula for disaster. Randle is a known dingaling, not the guy I want to entrust during critical moments in the game. That solution or "what if" option gives me no confidence whatsoever.

 

[CATCH17]

C'mon Catch, really? The caveat "similar" was a nice touch but vague as heck. I know you don't think either Randle or Dunbar could produce the HISTORIC results that Murray has as a rusher, no sane person would. But if Murray is not producing at a historic level, do the Cowboys still win? Plus Murray is doing more than just rushing at a historic pace, his touches, moreso his involvement in almost every offensive play not the least of which, pass protecting, is just as crucial to Cowboys success.

"Similar" production is a copout, and you know it. We do not know what COULD have happened with a RB other than Murray, that is abject speculation without a shred of basis (neither Randle or Dunbar have done anything in their past to suggest all the confidence the anti-Murray contingent are slinging). Randle's YPC is an extremely small sample size and extrapolating it to a full game with as many touches that Murray gets is a formula for disaster. Randle is a known dingaling, not the guy I want to entrust during critical moments in the game. That solution or "what if" option gives me no confidence whatsoever.

I don't know what you want me to say. Murray is a beast. He's better than anyone we have.

I just think that the Cowboys run game would still be a force to be reckoned with if we didn't have Murray or had to use him significantly less.

 

[theSHOW]

We would have the same success. Its the line not the running back.

I notice that the word "we" is now used in you're posts. Tell "Us" why never before the Cowboys beat the Saints, did that word "we" was never ...ever...used by you. Just wondering

 

[BAT]

I don't know what you want me to say. Murray is a beast. He's better than anyone we have.

I just think that the Cowboys run game would still be a force to be reckoned with if we didn't have Murray or had to use him significantly less.

So if its not broke, why fix it? Why mess with a good thing? Good thing is actually an understatement, why mess with a GREAT thing? What prompts "us" fans to WANT a lesser product?

 

[CATCH17]

So if its not broke, why fix it? Why mess with a good thing? Good thing is actually an understatement, why mess with a GREAT thing? What prompts "us" fans to WANT a lesser product?

I would give him less touches because even if he stays healthy I believe he may wear down towards the end of the year. I could be wrong though and he may stay healthy and play with as much energy in December as he does in October.

 

[Red Dragon]

You are being delusional now. None of our backs, other than Murray, has even had a 100 yard game............No one knows if either guy can hold up or even sustain 10 carries a game, let alone how they will produce.

This is a chicken-and-egg circular argument.

"Let's not give Randle and Dunbar more carries because they've never broken 100 yards in a game before."

"But if you don't give Randle and Dunbar more carries, how will they ever have a chance to break 100 yards in a game?"

 

[Red Dragon]

So if its not broke, why fix it? Why mess with a good thing? Good thing is actually an understatement, why mess with a GREAT thing? What prompts "us" fans to WANT a lesser product?

If you wear down and exhaust that thing too much, it becomes a lesser product.

 

[BAT]

This is a chicken-and-egg circular argument.

"Let's not give Randle and Dunbar more carries because they've never broken 100 yards in a game before."

"But if you don't give Randle and Dunbar more carries, how will they ever have a chance to break 100 yards in a game?"

They haven't had opportunities in the past when Murray went down? Murray is injured 90% of the time according to many on CZ, what has any RB done in his absence? And chicken-egg argument is poor analogy. More like full grown rooster vs. an egg. Murray is too good to have either Randle/Dunbar handle the ball more than Demarco. Neither guy is as good in all facets of the position like Murray, so relying on either when Murray is the better option would hurt the team.

 

[Red Dragon]

And chicken-egg argument is poor analogy. More like full grown rooster vs. an egg.

I don't think you understand the analogy.

Chicken-and-egg circular argument: "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

"Without the chicken there would be no egg."
"But without the egg there would be no chicken."

 

[BAT]

I don't think you understand the analogy.

Chicken-and-egg circular argument: "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

"Without the chicken there would be no egg."
"But without the egg there would be no chicken."

I understand the argument just fine, just think it is not the best analogy in this situation. Instead of which came first, which is better, should be the query.

 

[BAT]

If you wear down and exhaust that thing too much, it becomes a lesser product.

Strangest darn argument I have ever heard on here. Does no one remember Emmitt Smith and the 90's Cowboys? Who ever wanted Emmitt to DECREASE his touches then???

 

[Red Dragon]

Strangest darn argument I have ever heard on here. Does no one remember Emmitt Smith and the 90's Cowboys? Who ever wanted Emmitt to DECREASE his touches then???

In no regular season did Emmitt ever exceed 377 carries. In fact, when he was with the Cowboys, he averaged just 311 carries per season.


And if you don't think the human body undergoes stress and wear and tear - well, that should be physiologically obvious.

 

[jchap2k]

As long as we don't see any more of this, I want Murray to get as many touches as possible. He is amazing when he has the ball. Less amazing when he looses the ball, but he only does that once a game. If he keeps up his pace, I could live with that but I don't want to

 

[BAT]

In no regular season did Emmitt ever exceed 377 carries. In fact, when he was with the Cowboys, he averaged just 311 carries per season.


And if you don't think the human body undergoes stress and wear and tear - well, that should be physiologically obvious.

I do not know Murray's physiological limits and neither do you. There is possibility of season ending injury on EVERY play. Murray is fairly fresh since he has not had a full season since entering the league, plus no post season wear and tear. There are a lot of factors that go into touches. How physical the opposing team is playing, turf conditions, body temperature, type of hit, etc. There is no guarantee, NONE, that giving Murray 5-10 fewer touches will save him from injury THIS season. And all I am worried about is THIS season. If Murray is not concerned, if Linehan is not concerned, then why all the rampant armchair medical opinions? No one knows how much more dominant Cowboys can be (or the opposite) and things will change as the season progresses. Murrays touches will depend on game situations and it will balance itself out in the course of the season. All the crying about limiting his touches in a vacuum are silly. Everything must have context and every situation will be treated differently.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I do not know Murray's physiological limits and neither do you. There is possibility of season ending injury on EVERY play. Murray is fairly fresh since he has not had a full season since entering the league, plus no post season wear and tear. There are a lot of factors that go into touches. How physical the opposing team is playing, turf conditions, body temperature, type of hit, etc. There is no guarantee, NONE, that giving Murray 5-10 fewer touches will save him from injury THIS season. And all I am worried about is THIS season. If Murray is not concerned, if Linehan is not concerned, then why all the rampant armchair medical opinions? No one knows how much more dominant Cowboys can be (or the opposite) and things will change as the season progresses. Murrays touches will depend on game situations and it will balance itself out in the course of the season. All the crying about limiting his touches in a vacuum are silly. Everything must have context and every situation will be treated differently.

In situations where there are a lot of unknowns, doesn't it make sense to play it more conservatively? We don't know that all this work will end up wearing Murray down so that he's less effective in December and after, but it's certainly a possibility, so we should try to mitigate that risk as much as we can. Always balancing the need to win games now, of course.

 

[BAT]

In situations where there are a lot of unknowns, doesn't it make sense to play it more conservatively? We don't know that all this work will end up wearing Murray down so that he's less effective in December and after, but it's certainly a possibility, so we should try to mitigate that risk as much as we can. Always balancing the need to win games now, of course.

"If you are going to fight a gorilla, you can't hit him lightly, you have to give all you got." And I would keep hitting it with all I have until one of us goes down. 16 game seasons is life or death every Sunday, no time for conservatism IMO. You take any game lightly and lose, that could bite you in the end.

Let's worry about life after Murray IF it actually happens. There is a reason why not many backs have over 400 carries, lots of things happen during the course of the season. But let's not take a timid approach is all I am saying. I want my best players in the game as often as possible. There will be situational opportunities for others but let's not cost ourselves any games because we are trying to maintain a strict carry count.

 

[JD_KaPow]

"If you are going to fight a gorilla, you can't hit him lightly, you have to give all you got." And I would keep hitting it with all I have until one of us goes down. 16 game seasons is life or death every Sunday, no time for conservatism IMO. You take any game lightly and lose, that could bite you in the end.

Let's worry about life after Murray IF it actually happens. There is a reason why not many backs have over 400 carries, lots of things happen during the course of the season. But let's not take a timid approach is all I am saying. I want my best players in the game as often as possible. There will be situational opportunities for others but let's not cost ourselves any games because we are trying to maintain a strict carry count.

Forget next year: there's an easy solution to that, which is don't sign Murray. And forget "strict carry counts", because nobody's talking about that. But it's crazy for the team not to think in terms of pacing itself for the late season/playoffs. Your goal is to win as many games over the course of the entire season (and postseason) as possible, and it's a poor head coach who doesn't keep that in mind.

 

[BAT]

Forget next year: there's an easy solution to that, which is don't sign Murray. And forget "strict carry counts", because nobody's talking about that. But it's crazy for the team not to think in terms of pacing itself for the late season/playoffs. Your goal is to win as many games over the course of the entire season (and postseason) as possible, and it's a poor head coach who doesn't keep that in mind.

It's a balancing act for sure. But the poor head coach analogy works both ways, I rather be the poor head coach who gives it all I got than the poor head coach who changes things that are working in preparation for something that is not sure to happen, then things fall apart.

This OL loves blocking for Murray. Romo is more comfortable with Murray in pass pro. Sometimes you can overthink something. It's like jazz music or being in the zone, you just go with it, but think on it too much ....

 

[Red Dragon]

But it's crazy for the team not to think in terms of pacing itself for the late season/playoffs. Your goal is to win as many games over the course of the entire season (and postseason) as possible, and it's a poor head coach who doesn't keep that in mind.

This.

Many people are calling for Murray to be as much as possible to help the Cowboys win "now." Sure, but if a worn-down Murray is of little use come playoff time, those same people will probably be complaining.