Well, some would argue that we did lose to GB because of Murray...he did have a pretty big fumble in that game that would have been a TD instead had he just hung on to the ball.
Good post. Consider this:
If Murray had held on and scored in the Packer game, Murray would have been lauded as one of the best running backs ever by some fans. Some fans actually imply that distinction even after he fumbled based upon a few outstanding games during his first seasons in the league and his great season last year. Regardless of what could have happened and what did happened, Murray has not received much negative backlash for committing a crucial error during a pivotal game.
However IF Romo had thrown an interception...
IF Romo had fumbled and didn't recover the ball...
Romo would be getting crucified to this very day still. In reality, we read and hear more about what Romo didn't do than what Murray did. We read and hear how Romo didn't choose to throw to another receiver during a crucial play. We read and hear how Romo didn't convert a huge 4th down. We read and hear these things about what Romo didn't do despite the fact he threw a
perfect pass with the game on the line. Romo did his job and people griped. Murray didn't do his and what has been general fan reaction? Kinda hard to determine through the haze of general indifference.
This is an example of what troubles me about football discussion--the inability to assign appropriate credit and blame. Certainly Peppers made a good play knocking the ball out of Murray's grasp. He did his job. Murray could have protected the ball better and held on. That was the job he failed to do. It cost the team a huge play during a huge drive that could have resulted in a huge gain or possibly a touchdown. Yet how much flack does he get for a huge fumble on a Cowboys forum like this?
I'll let others decide. That is when others aren't pining over Murray's leaving for the Eagles.