Looking closer at McFadden

[DFWJC]

Jamaal Charles in KC, Matt Forte in Chi, MJD in Jax for a number of years, Alfred Morris in Was, Arian Foster in Hou, Adrian Peterson in Min. These are just recent examples.

KC has had good run blocking
Chicago had okay run blocking and big threat to throw it
Jax had a decent line too...and I think Garrard was very solid...but agree the threat to pass was low mostly due to no WRs. he might be the best example
The ZBS opened it up for Morris and Foster. Plus, Morris' best year was when RG3 was a run threat. Fosters run blocking line was plenty good.
Peterson has never played with a terrible Oline...imo.

 

[xwalker]

There are plenty of running backs who have had bad lines and QB play and have succeeded over the years. There's a reason why he was a bargain basement pickup. He just isn't very good at this point and he will have to earn a spot on this team. Hopefully, with a limited amount of snaps, he can produce.

That's exactly what I was thinking, until I went and watched the games. I looked at his carries from a standpoint of asking what he could have done differently or what a better back would have gotten out of a play. And, to be honest, he was much more productive than he should have been. There were very few times (almost none) where I said he should have hit this or that hole faster. Instead, there were a lot of times where it was just him getting multiple defenders staring him directly in the face as he received the handoff.

In any event, my point wasn't that he'll be super productive here. Maybe he will and maybe he won't. My point was merely that he looks better than Randle to me. I didn't previously think that McFadden would be the bell cow out of this group but now I'm thinking he has the best shot at it.

I didn't expect much either when I reviewed his game footage, but he was much better than I expected.

IMO, there are other RBs that would be better with a bad OLine. McFadden is a bit of a long strider that needs to get going and then make his 1 cut and get up-field. A jitter-bug or what I call "dancing" type RB would be better behind a bad OL where they have to evade defenders in the backfield. It is hard to even express just how bad the OL was in Oakland.

DeMarco Murray is very similar in that he would also not be the ideal RB to have with a bad OL.

In regards to other RBs having better averages, that's not really true. Latavius Murray only had a few more carries in 2014 than Joseph Randle. Randle had a 6.7 average vs 4.7 for DeMarco Murray. Latavius Murray's average in the games he started was about 3.9 yards/carry.

There is some question about his 1 year in the Zone blocking scheme, but his average that year was about the same as a couple of other years, so I'm not sure the Zone scheme was really the total problem. The 1st year of a Zone scheme is usually not good. It is a big change for both the OL and the RBs. Murray's lowest average was his 1st year in the Zone scheme.

I do like the fact that he is terrific in Pass Protection and is a terrific receiver.

I'm confident that McFadden will be at least a decent RB if he stays healthy. I don't think it is a good idea to give him 20+ carries per game.

 

[jday]

For me, he's just been sort of an afterthought. A guy that I didn't expect to have a real shot at the lead role. Kind of a joke, actually. You hear about the bad OLine play but that seemed to be more of an embarrassing excuse.

Well, I went and watched a few games from 2014 to see what was there. Let me just say, if you feel like you're taking our line for granted you can watch the Raiders and quickly realize how lucky we are. I didn't remember what it was like to see 3 guys in the backfield blowing up a run. And as bad as their line play was, the QB play was even worse, almost comical.

But when McFadden was able to get a crease, or heaven forbid, a hole, he knew what to do with it. Good vision and burst, with a decisive one cut and go style of play. He had surprisingly strong inside run ability as well.

I've been firmly in the Joseph Randle camp, thinking there's an outside shot at Ryan Williams surprising us too. But I have to say now that McFadden is the better player from what I can tell.

Just my $0.02.

My expectations are low, but I would not be at all surprised if McFadden has a successful season behind the Cowboys offensive line.

 

[Doc50]

I didn't expect much either when I reviewed his game footage, but he was much better than I expected.

IMO, there are other RBs that would be better with a bad OLine. McFadden is a bit of a long strider that needs to get going and then make his 1 cut and get up-field. A jitter-bug or what I call "dancing" type RB would be better behind a bad OL where they have to evade defenders in the backfield. It is hard to even express just how bad the OL was in Oakland.

DeMarco Murray is very similar in that he would also not be the ideal RB to have with a bad OL.

In regards to other RBs having better averages, that's not really true. Latavius Murray only had a few more carries in 2014 than Joseph Randle. Randle had a 6.7 average vs 4.7 for DeMarco Murray. Latavius Murray's average in the games he started was about 3.9 yards/carry.

There is some question about his 1 year in the Zone blocking scheme, but his average that year was about the same as a couple of other years, so I'm not sure the Zone scheme was really the total problem. The 1st year of a Zone scheme is usually not good. It is a big change for both the OL and the RBs. Murray's lowest average was his 1st year in the Zone scheme.

I do like the fact that he is terrific in Pass Protection and is a terrific receiver.

I'm confident that McFadden will be at least a decent RB if he stays healthy. I don't think it is a good idea to give him 20+ carries per game.

Agreed.

Could very well end up with D-Mac and Randle at 1 & 2, then Dunbar, Williams, Days, et al, battling for back-up duty with ST value.

Will be interesting to see how it shakes out in TC; wouldn't surprise me to see another move made and also see someone drop out with injury.

 

[theogt]

I didn't expect much either when I reviewed his game footage, but he was much better than I expected.

IMO, there are other RBs that would be better with a bad OLine. McFadden is a bit of a long strider that needs to get going and then make his 1 cut and get up-field. A jitter-bug or what I call "dancing" type RB would be better behind a bad OL where they have to evade defenders in the backfield. It is hard to even express just how bad the OL was in Oakland.

DeMarco Murray is very similar in that he would also not be the ideal RB to have with a bad OL.

In regards to other RBs having better averages, that's not really true. Latavius Murray only had a few more carries in 2014 than Joseph Randle. Randle had a 6.7 average vs 4.7 for DeMarco Murray. Latavius Murray's average in the games he started was about 3.9 yards/carry.

There is some question about his 1 year in the Zone blocking scheme, but his average that year was about the same as a couple of other years, so I'm not sure the Zone scheme was really the total problem. The 1st year of a Zone scheme is usually not good. It is a big change for both the OL and the RBs. Murray's lowest average was his 1st year in the Zone scheme.

I do like the fact that he is terrific in Pass Protection and is a terrific receiver.

I'm confident that McFadden will be at least a decent RB if he stays healthy. I don't think it is a good idea to give him 20+ carries per game.

I agree completely. A jitterbug McFadden is not. The comments about him not being ideal from a zone blocking scheme seem strange to me. He seems exactly that type. He is best when he is moving forward, and he can make a jump cut and then take off, which is what you want out of a RB in a zone blocking scheme.

 

[Bullflop]

I oftentimes imagine what it might be like to be a Raiders' fan and be subjected to seeing Darren McFadden doing really well with the Cowboys after being basically ineffective for the Raiders. I'll bet it'd drive 'em nuts!

 

[skinsscalper]

I can see us carrying 4 backs this year if we don't make any moves. I think the question marks surrounding the health of every back except Randle will be enough to keep 4 around.
I wish we knew who the coaches favored to be the starting back. This is the guy who usually gets the job regardless of preseason production from the others. Of course they will always say it's an open competition but it rarely is. I would guess and say McFadden has the job to lose with Randle being the back they plan to give carries to to rest McFadden.

Pretty decent guess, IMO. I think the FO and coaches think a lot more of McFadden than the average fan (especially us die hards) does. It does make me a little nervous, to be honest. But, I'm going to defer to the guys (coaches and personnel) that do this for a living who know a hell of a lot more than I do. Not in a "these guys are infallible" sort of way but more in a "these past couple of years worth of successful personnel decisions have been the right ones" sort of way. No one is perfect in the way of personnel management but this group has earned some well deserved collateral and damned good bit of credibility regarding these matters the past couple of seasons.

I'm O.K. with what these guys have deemed best for the team until they prove that they don't have a clue. No reason not to, IMO, at this point.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Well as soon as DMac breaks one for 60 yards everyone will be on his bandwagon.

And he will.......with his speed alot of runs we saw Murray looking around for someone to hit will be TDs.

Sorry, but the stats suggest otherwise.......................

McFadden career carries.....................1,038

Runs over 60 yards...................................2.......... (only 1 in the last 3 seasons)........that means less than 2/10th of 1% of his runs were for 60 or more yards.



You don't average 3.3 YPC over the past three seasons by breaking off runs to the house.............most of McFadden's carries were for minimal gains or losses.............the stats don't lie, I wish they were better but they are not.

 

[gimmesix]

I'm pretty sure Williams still averaged less than 4 YPC last year in this preseason I have heard so many people reference as hope for him becoming the lead back. Didn't he have 1 run that gave him the majority of his yards and still managed less than 4 YPC? Not 100% sure.

He averaged 4.5 for the preseason, but under 4 in two of his three games. If not for a 27-yard run in the second game, it would have been a bad preseason. Of course, some here will blame his poor games on playing with a poor line.

I love his bottom line, 25 carries, 112 yards (4.5) and 1 TD, for a game, but I don't care for the makeup of it because there are too many short gains that put you in passing situation whether than 3- to 4-yard consistency. That's my biggest issue with this pack of back: They might hit home runs, but also strikeout too often.

 

[dboyz]

I agree with the OP. The metrics say that McFadden sucked (at least last year), but in reviewing some of Oakland's games I came away with the same impression. McFadden ran well and was very much willing to stick his nose in their and grind out a few yards; if he gets a lane he is upfield in a hurry. He has a good nose for the endzone. I don't have a good answer for the disparity between the numbers and what I saw, but I'm interested to see what McFadden can do behind a good line.

 

[AdamJT13]

Sorry, but the stats suggest otherwise.......................

McFadden career carries.....................1,038

Runs over 60 yards...................................2.......... (only 1 in the last 3 seasons)........that means less than 2/10th of 1% of his runs were for 60 or more yards.

Can't run for 60 yards or more when you're not at least 60 yards from the end zone.

McFadden has 532 career carries at least 60 yards from the end zone, with two of those going for 60-plus (both for touchdowns) -- that's 0.376 percent. The NFL average during his career is 0.358 percent of carries in those situations gaining 60-plus, with 0.241 percent going for touchdowns. So McFadden has been above average in that regard. Murray, on the other hand, has 446 such carries, with one gaining 60-plus ( a TD), which is 0.224 percent.

most of McFadden's carries were for minimal gains or losses

Most of the runs in the NFL are for minimal gains or losses -- about 44 percent go for 2 yards or less, another 12 percent gain 3 yards, 10 percent gain 4 yards and 34 percent gain 5 yards or more. That's 56 percent of all rushing attempts that pick up 3 yards or less.

 

[Galian Beast]

For me, he's just been sort of an afterthought. A guy that I didn't expect to have a real shot at the lead role. Kind of a joke, actually. You hear about the bad OLine play but that seemed to be more of an embarrassing excuse.

Well, I went and watched a few games from 2014 to see what was there. Let me just say, if you feel like you're taking our line for granted you can watch the Raiders and quickly realize how lucky we are. I didn't remember what it was like to see 3 guys in the backfield blowing up a run. And as bad as their line play was, the QB play was even worse, almost comical.

But when McFadden was able to get a crease, or heaven forbid, a hole, he knew what to do with it. Good vision and burst, with a decisive one cut and go style of play. He had surprisingly strong inside run ability as well.

I've been firmly in the Joseph Randle camp, thinking there's an outside shot at Ryan Williams surprising us too. But I have to say now that McFadden is the better player from what I can tell.

Just my $0.02.

It'll take at least one great game for me to get on the McFadden bandwagon. Just so many poor seasons in Oakland that I can't ignore.

 

[Biggems]

It isn't just the OL.....it is also the QB, WRs, and TEs.......I mean Oakland has had garbage at QB for a while, their WRs are ok but not world beaters, and they have had maybe one good TE during the DMC era. So, while Oakland did have somewhat of a deep threat passing game, overall the passing part of the offense was mediocre. So, you have a mediocre passing game and a poor OL, well it makes sense that the running game will struggle a bit, especially if it proves to be successful at a point.......cause then defenses realize that the passing game is not a real threat so they load up to stop the run.

Now, you take an offense like Dallas........great OL, top notch QB, stud WR, HOF TE, and decent secondary WRs......so now, the defense cannot focus on just one area of the offense. It makes it much easier to run, pass, play action, etc......I am not a fan of McFadden, never have been.....didn't like Felix either......but, I think DMC can do some nice things for us this year. If we do indeed do a RB by committee, I can see him getting about 700-800 yds. and 6-8 TDs.....the same as Randle.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Can't run for 60 yards or more when you're not at least 60 yards from the end zone.

McFadden has 532 career carries at least 60 yards from the end zone, with two of those going for 60-plus (both for touchdowns) -- that's 0.376 percent. The NFL average during his career is 0.358 percent of carries in those situations gaining 60-plus, with 0.241 percent going for touchdowns. So McFadden has been above average in that regard. Murray, on the other hand, has 446 such carries, with one gaining 60-plus ( a TD), which is 0.224 percent.




Most of the runs in the NFL are for minimal gains or losses -- about 44 percent go for 2 yards or less, another 12 percent gain 3 yards, 10 percent gain 4 yards and 34 percent gain 5 yards or more. That's 56 percent of all rushing attempts that pick up 3 yards or less.

I got some stats too..................lets see who is breaking the most runs................since 2011 (Murray's rookie season), lets compare..........................


# of runs 40 yards or more......................Murray has 9.............................McFadden has 4

# of runs 20 yards or more......................Murray has 35 (WOW)...............McFadden has 17

# of TD runs...............................................Murray has 28...........................McFadden has 13


Anybody want to try to argue with a straight face that McFadden is in any way shape or form in Murray's league?.....................there is a reason one back is making $8 million a season and the other back was signed for a happy meal.

 

[Beast_from_East]

It isn't just the OL.....it is also the QB, WRs, and TEs.......I mean Oakland has had garbage at QB for a while, their WRs are ok but not world beaters, and they have had maybe one good TE during the DMC era. So, while Oakland did have somewhat of a deep threat passing game, overall the passing part of the offense was mediocre. So, you have a mediocre passing game and a poor OL, well it makes sense that the running game will struggle a bit, especially if it proves to be successful at a point.......cause then defenses realize that the passing game is not a real threat so they load up to stop the run.

Now, you take an offense like Dallas........great OL, top notch QB, stud WR, HOF TE, and decent secondary WRs......so now, the defense cannot focus on just one area of the offense. It makes it much easier to run, pass, play action, etc......I am not a fan of McFadden, never have been.....didn't like Felix either......but, I think DMC can do some nice things for us this year. If we do indeed do a RB by committee, I can see him getting about 700-800 yds. and 6-8 TDs.....the same as Randle.

The problem with this argument bro is that McFadden's teammates in Oakland were posting better numbers than he was with the same oline, same QB, same WRs, same TEs, ect.

The "it was Oakland excuse" has been debunked in multiple threads................nobody has been able to explain how McFadden's numbers are worse than the other RBs Oakland used if you are saying the lack of offensive talent is the reason he sucked.

Also, Chris Johnson is used as an example of how a RB can still post respectable numbers despite a horrible passing game. Chris Johnson was still able to post a 4.3 average despite playing with a Jr. High School level QB with the Jets last year.

 

[xwalker]

Sorry, but the stats suggest otherwise.......................

McFadden career carries.....................1,038

Runs over 60 yards...................................2.......... (only 1 in the last 3 seasons)........that means less than 2/10th of 1% of his runs were for 60 or more yards.



You don't average 3.3 YPC over the past three seasons by breaking off runs to the house.............most of McFadden's carries were for minimal gains or losses.............the stats don't lie, I wish they were better but they are not.

That is a misleading stat. The only chance to have a 60 yard run is when they are 60 yard or more from the end zone. That makes the possibilities really low.

Sproles has Zero over 60 yards in his career.

LeSean McCoy has 3.

Looking at something like 30 yard runs would be more interesting.

 

[Bullet22]

I'm not a big fan of the McFadden pickup, mostly because he reportedly struggled so much with zone blocking when OAK tried it. That said, though, it's possible that one type of runner could have more trouble with shedding tacklers in the backfield than another type of runner might. I'm not saying that that's what went on in OAK, because I haven't bothered to look at their games at all, but I could definitely see a bad OL affecting one back more than it does another in one situation and it being a different story altogether in a better blocked scheme.

I hope for our sake DMF has a great season, even if I'm skeptical. He appears to be a good guy, too, and a hard worker. It'd be awesome of our proscouts were to deliver a rabbit out of a tiny hat yet again.

They may have had a zone blocking scheme, but did very little blocking...He will shine in Dallas..

 

[FLcowboy]

I'm not a big fan of the McFadden pickup, mostly because he reportedly struggled so much with zone blocking when OAK tried it. That said, though, it's possible that one type of runner could have more trouble with shedding tacklers in the backfield than another type of runner might. I'm not saying that that's what went on in OAK, because I haven't bothered to look at their games at all, but I could definitely see a bad OL affecting one back more than it does another in one situation and it being a different story altogether in a better blocked scheme.

I hope for our sake DMF has a great season, even if I'm skeptical. He appears to be a good guy, too, and a hard worker. It'd be awesome of our proscouts were to deliver a rabbit out of a tiny hat yet again.

You have to have faith the pro scouts are pretty good. Look at what they did for the defense last year.

 

[Corso]

That's exactly what I was thinking, until I went and watched the games. I looked at his carries from a standpoint of asking what he could have done differently or what a better back would have gotten out of a play. And, to be honest, he was much more productive than he should have been. There were very few times (almost none) where I said he should have hit this or that hole faster. Instead, there were a lot of times where it was just him getting multiple defenders staring him directly in the face as he received the handoff.

In any event, my point wasn't that he'll be super productive here. Maybe he will and maybe he won't. My point was merely that he looks better than Randle to me. I didn't previously think that McFadden would be the bell cow out of this group but now I'm thinking he has the best shot at it.

Totally underrated post. This one should get more likes by anyone who appreciates layman's analysis, as if it could be better than their's if they even would try.
Good job Theo Huxtable.

 

[Texas_Pete]

I oftentimes imagine what it might be like to be a Raiders' fan and be subjected to seeing Darren McFadden doing really well with the Cowboys after being basically ineffective for the Raiders. I'll bet it'd drive 'em nuts!

Ha Ha! Just like seeing Ro McClain ball out for us last year. Most fans and media thought he was done or would retire again.