Murray's Fumble Issues - Fixable?

[Future]

1 in 2011 (lost 0), 3 in 2012 (lost only 2) 3 in 2013 (lost only 1) and 6 in 2014. I will say this again. IT HAS NOT BEEN A CONSISTENT ISSUE THROUGHOUT HIS CAREER. Period. Such revisionist history. Every down backs usually have a handful of fumbles per year. Look at some of the best backs #s you'll be surprised.

Over the last three seasons, it's 12 fumbles on 914 touches. That's a rate of 1 fumble per 76 touches. If you go the last two seasons, it's 9 fumbles on 719 touches...1 per 80. That's bad.

I don't care how many fumbles other backs have, that fumble rate is poor and it's not revisionist. He's not an explosive enough runner, a la AP, to overcome that kind of problem.

His numbers also don't include the fumble against the Saints that went out of bounds...and in a sample size like this, that would drop his rate like 10% over the last two seasons.

 

[ufcrules1]

That is what I can't stand. The fans that flat out ignore Dez' fumbles and overemphasize Murray's. Turnovers happen and after a rough patch in the beginning of the year, Murray only had like 1 fumble in the last 8 games.

He only had 1 fumble int he last game due to luck.. he was still carrying the ball poorly that whole time. I watched every single game and he didn't change a thing with how he is carrying the ball.

 

[Future]

That is what I can't stand. The fans that flat out ignore Dez' fumbles and overemphasize Murray's. Turnovers happen and after a rough patch in the beginning of the year, Murray only had like 1 fumble in the last 8 games.

Who ignores Dez' fumbles? They haven't come up recently because he only had one fumble this year.

And the difference between the two players is that Dez is a gamebreaker, DeMarco isn't. He gets more forgiveness.

 

[Nightman]

Over the last three seasons, it's 12 fumbles on 914 touches. That's a rate of 1 fumble per 76 touches. If you go the last two seasons, it's 9 fumbles on 719 touches...1 per 80. That's bad.

I don't care how many fumbles other backs have, that fumble rate is poor and it's not revisionist. He's not an explosive enough runner, a la AP, to overcome that kind of problem.

His numbers also don't include the fumble against the Saints that went out of bounds...and in a sample size like this, that would drop his rate like 10% over the last two seasons.

1 per 80 is not bad by any metric. The Patriots were looked at suspiciously because they were only fumbling at a rate of 1 per 74.

 

[Nightman]

Who ignores Dez' fumbles? They haven't come up recently because he only had one fumble this year.

And the difference between the two players is that Dez is a gamebreaker, DeMarco isn't. He gets more forgiveness.

That's a terrible excuse. I have not heard one person say they had reservations about Dez because of his fumbling problems.

 

[Nightman]

He only had 1 fumble int he last game due to luck.. he was still carrying the ball poorly that whole time. I watched every single game and he didn't change a thing with how he is carrying the ball.

He lost most of his fumbles because he was fighting for extra yards in heavy traffic, not because of ball placement. He changed something because his rate went way down after the first half of the season.

 

[Doomsday101]

Who ignores Dez' fumbles? They haven't come up recently because he only had one fumble this year.

And the difference between the two players is that Dez is a gamebreaker, DeMarco isn't. He gets more forgiveness.

and Murray was the work horse and this team comes no where close to 12 wins without his production. Dallas being able to control the ball and the clock was in large part because of Murray. Dunbar and Randle sure as hell were not carrying the load. no doubt Dez is a playmaker and important to the team but the same token Murray was very important to this team. Strange before every game people would come in here and say Murray has to carry it at least 25 time in this game for us to have a chance to win. Murray often did just that and the Cowboys won. Now the season is over and anyone could just do it.

 

[Future]

1 per 80 is not bad by any metric. The Patriots were looked at suspiciously because they were only fumbling at a rate of 1 per 74.

Uh, the Pats were fumbling at a rate of 1 per 187 plays.

That's a terrible excuse. I have not heard one person say they had reservations about Dez because of his fumbling problems.

Why would you? He doesn't touch the ball 25 times a game.

 

[Future]

and Murray was the work horse and this team comes no where close to 12 wins without his production. Dallas being able to control the ball and the clock was in large part because of Murray. Dunbar and Randle sure as hell were not carrying the load. no doubt Dez is a playmaker and important to the team but the same token Murray was very important to this team. Strange before every game people would come in here and say Murray has to carry it at least 25 time in this game for us to have a chance to win. Murray often did just that and the Cowboys won. Now the season is over and anyone could just do it.

Murray was the work horse for the first time in his career, and he couldn't freaking hold on to the football.

Per bolded...No. Emphatically no. It was because of the OL and the attention that the passing game commanded. Murray is a good player and had a great season, but he isn't even in Dez' stratosphere when it comes to importance to this team.

That 25 carries number is and always has been more about committing to the run than about Murray, specifically. At least to me anyways.

 

[Doomsday101]

Murray was the work horse for the first time in his career, and he couldn't freaking hold on to the football.

Per bolded...No. Emphatically no. It was because of the OL and the attention that the passing game commanded. Murray is a good player and had a great season, but he isn't even in Dez' stratosphere when it comes to importance to this team.

That 25 carries number is and always has been more about committing to the run than about Murray, specifically. At least to me anyways.

OL plays a part hell OL plays a part in Dez getting a chance to make a catch the OL plays a part in Romo having time As for the attentions teams played towards the passing game? LOL team were often stacking the line it had nothing to do with the passing game. As for Fumbles I don't accept any ones fumbles be it Murray, Romo or Dez. You are right Dez does not touch the ball 25 times a game and yet has 11 fumbles in his career in Dallas vs 12 by Murray. You can spin it as you choose but for the most part Murray has not had a big issue with fumbles through out his career. None are acceptable no matter who it is. So while you will excuse one and come down on the other only show how big of a hypocrite you are.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

In all fairness here, Murray was playing with a broken hand against GB. Not saying he still does not have issue with how he carries the ball but fair is fair.

For my money, this is the greatest back I've ever seen play and nobody carried the ball worse then he did.

 

[Nightman]

Uh, the Pats were fumbling at a rate of 1 per 187 plays.

Why would you? He doesn't touch the ball 25 times a game.

Yet he has just as many fumbles....hmmmmm

and your Pats number is plays per fumble lost, mine was for plays per fumble

 

[Nightman]

In all fairness here, Murray was playing with a broken hand against GB. Not saying he still does not have issue with how he carries the ball but fair is fair.

For my money, this is the greatest back I've ever seen play and nobody carried the ball worse then he did.

Tony Dorsett, Franco Harris and Walter Payton were 3 of the worst fumblers of all time

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Tony Dorsett, Franco Harris and Walter Payton were 3 of the worst fumblers of all time

The other side of that is that the game was much more physical then.

 

[Doomsday101]

The other side of that is that the game was much more physical then.

the game more physical then? RB are not getting any slack, there is not hitting of a defenseless RB, you can go high or low they are not getting protected and guys are bigger, stronger and faster today

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

the game more physical then? RB are not getting any slack, there is not hitting of a defenseless RB, you can go high or low they are not getting protected and guys are bigger, stronger and faster today

Yes. It was more physical then. The guys are bigger and stronger but that's on both sides of the ball. In the old days, you didn't throw as much so the defenses were much more focused on the RBs. Late hits then, are not what they are now. Blocking techniques on the OL are much more liberal now then they were then. Stuff that got called then is not even looked at as a possible penalty in todays game, along the OL. That allows backs to run more freely and limits the Defenses ability to flow to the ball carrier. Lots of other reasons I have not gone into but yes, IMO, it was much, much more physical then then it is today.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yes. It was more physical then. The guys are bigger and stronger but that's on both sides of the ball. In the old days, you didn't throw as much so the defenses were much more focused on the RBs. Late hits then, are not what they are now. Blocking techniques on the OL are much more liberal now then they were then. Stuff that got called then is not even looked at as a possible penalty in todays game, along the OL. That allows backs to run more freely and limits the Defenses ability to flow to the ball carrier. Lots of other reasons I have not gone into but yes, IMO, it was much, much more physical then then it is today.

I don't see RB catching any breaks rules when it comes to running has not changed much. Dallas was not sneaking up on teams in terms of running they knew coming into the game, they stacked the line often sorry I disagree they there is a built in excuse for other backs but Murray is being held out? Less rules maybe less physical no

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't see RB catching any breaks rules when it comes to running has not changed much. Dallas was not sneaking up on teams in terms of running they knew coming into the game, they stacked the line often sorry I disagree they there is a built in excuse for other backs but Murray is being held out? Less rules maybe less physical no

It's changed a lot. You can no longer hit backs anywhere. The head was not off limits. Forward progress, late hits are called much more closely now. Ground can not cause a fumble. The entire passing game and the fact that it has been made much easier to pass puts less focus on Defenses and the running game. That means that Defenses are geared much more towards defending the pass then focusing on the ball carrier. Extending the arms and much more use of the hands on the OL has completely changed the running game.

 

[gimmesix]

I think his "problem" is overblown. He had a rough stretch, but it hasn't been consistent throughout his career. That being said, I agree he has poor hand placement. The ball should be cradled at the TIPS by the elbow/bicep and the hand/fingers.

I think the bigger issue is that he lets the ball get loose away from his body too often. That makes it easier to knock out than when it is pressed tightly against the body, essentially meaning that the ball is gripped on both sides.

Even if he was cradling the tip in the first picture, that ball could be knocked out by someone punching the other tip and it's easier to do because the only thing between the defender and the ball would be air.

 

[gimmesix]

Marshawn Lynch had 3 fumbles this season or 1 fumble every 105.6 touches. For his career, Marshawn Lynch fumbles the ball once every 87.4 touches. For his career, DeMarco Murray fumbles the ball once every 92.1 touches. This season Murray fumbled the ball once every 89.8 touches.

I just don't see that as an excuse for poor ball security, which was evident this season. We need to count ourselves fortunate that Murray did not fumble more holding the ball away from his body the way that he did. It's something he needs to fix or we might be talking about even more fumbles next season (if we re-sign him).