Preparing to be disappointed with RB pick

[MichaelWinicki]

How many RB's in this draft to you think there are that can keep us at that level that Murray provided?

I would say "none".

Only because I wouldn't foresee the Cowboys giving any back 24.5 carries per game.

It just isn't going to happen for a rookie... And it may not happen ever again period.

What they did with Murray struck me as "Dr. Frankenstein-ish" in that they had a perfect storm... A back on his contract year, an improved offensive line, a new personality calling plays.

The result was a back who was pushed well beyond what you should probably push any back.

And I don't see it happening again.

I think you're looking much at a system where the top back gets about 18 carries per game. And that being said no back will be put into the position where they're having to replace Murray's production in total.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Murray can't even keep us at the level Murray provided in 2014.

Exactly.

No way would he have 24 1/2 carries a game this season.

And thereby he wouldn't have the production he did last season.

All this "doom & gloom" about the Cowboys running game for the upcoming season seems nonsensical.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

My biggest fear is repeating our season from 2010. Granted, the 2009 playoff team was much different makeup, but they just did not make the necessary moves to fix the team. Specifically, we ran the ball very well in 2009 and then it crapped out in 2010. But I guess we have a better OL now.

That's exactly why is won't happen... a better AND YOUNGER offensive line.

 

[Idgit]

My biggest fear is repeating our season from 2010. Granted, the 2009 playoff team was much different makeup, but they just did not make the necessary moves to fix the team. Specifically, we ran the ball very well in 2009 and then it crapped out in 2010. But I guess we have a better OL now.

We stayed-put that season, when we definitely needed to shake things up a bit. It was a disaster.

I've never thought we were winning games because we were running the ball, and I know that puts me in the minority in a thread like this. But I'm honestly happy if we just keep the very good OL, pass the ball well, and have options for running it as much as our OC wants to run it. I just don't see a scenario where we're not able to move the ball on the ground at all with this OL.
What needs to change, though, is we need to have a defense that makes it harder for the other good QB to throw the ball against us. That would just give us so much more margin for error than we've had in recent years. It's worth whatever hit the RB position has to take to improve that front 7 and to get coverage players who are legitimate options to provide depth down the line as snaps and injuries start to take their toll.

Plus, I really believe that whichever back Dallas selects, we're looking back in a year or three and saying he's one of the top 2-3 players at his position from this draft class. The opportunity here is just too significant for us not to have some success if we stick with it.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

What needs to change, though, is we need to have a defense that makes it harder for the other good QB to throw the ball against us. That would just give us so much more margin for error than we've had in recent years.

This.

Wanna beat Green Bay?

Have a better defense.

 

[JohnsKey19]

I think this will be one of the storylines of the draft through Day 3. Assuming Gurley/Gordon are off the board before 27, I would not be surprised to see Dallas wait until the 4th to make a RB selection.

 

[Alexander]

We've added Hardy, Lawrence is in year two, Crawford looking good, Lee is back and RoMcLain. I can see a case for a much better front seven, especially if there is rookie contribution.

More young blood to rotate. I think depending on the McClains, Whaleys, Jack Crawfords and Gardners to blossom like butterflies is asking too much. A lot is made about getting an end for edge rushing, we have to protect the middle. Not only with a push for the pass rush but to disrupt the run because we are going to get a steady diet of it.

 

[Alexander]

We haven't forgotten. We haven't forgotten the sight of Murray rambling for six or seven yards without being touched at all either. Just because we don't have one guy get 1800 yards this year means its a failure or a step back. If it takes two this year, so be it.

So we will have two backs, probably vastly different in makeup and running style, gel to the point where each gets 900 yards? Then we can go say "see, same thing".

Why hasn't Seattle just elevated Robert Turbin and Christine Michael and dumped an expensive Marshawn Lynch and just used the two equals one approach?

 

[DFWJC]

My biggest fear is repeating our season from 2010. Granted, the 2009 playoff team was much different makeup, but they just did not make the necessary moves to fix the team. Specifically, we ran the ball very well in 2009 and then it crapped out in 2010. But I guess we have a better OL now.

Garrett and McClay don't seem to be stand pat type of guys. Competition and youth seem to be big themes. Also going for substance over style.

 

[Idgit]

This.

Wanna beat Green Bay?

Have a better defense.

Yep. Draft is a crap shoot, anyway. If we have to make personnel changes, let's do it where the bar isn't all that high to begin with. Better odds for success.
There's going to be a good RB there for us in round 3, anyway. They don't end up going all that quickly, and there are a lot of them available this year. I'm not sweating it. I just want front 7 players there for us in round one.

 

[BlindFaith]

So we will have two backs, probably vastly different in makeup and running style, gel to the point where each gets 900 yards? Then we can go say "see, same thing".

Why hasn't Seattle just elevated Robert Turbin and Christine Michael and dumped an expensive Marshawn Lynch and just used the two equals one approach?

You'd have to ask them. Turbin has played very well for them in his limited touches. And Turbin was a 4th round pick.

Don't know much about Michael except that he was a second rounder. Don't know if he's been hurt or what.

Part of it is that they are paying Lynch a boatload of money. Makes it harder to take him off the field. If you have a couple of guys making around the same, it would be easier to play both of them.

 

[Alexander]

You'd have to ask them. Turbin has played very well for them in his limited touches. And Turbin was a 4th round pick.

Don't know much about Michael except that he was a second rounder. Don't know if he's been hurt or what.

Part of it is that they are paying Lynch a boatload of money. Makes it harder to take him off the field. If you have a couple of guys making around the same, it would be easier to play both of them.

My point was they could have moved on from him after last season. They did not. Why? Because he established tempo. Murray was at that point in stages. I do not fault the Cowboys for not paying him. It is what they do at this point to get that personality back that matters. And it probably will not materialize plugging two average talents in there thinking they just plug away and get the yards. It is not just about the raw yardage. It is about imposing your will, not just from the line but from the back himself.

 

[Gaede]

All of our focus on running back, it's inevitable we are disappointed with the result.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

So we will have two backs, probably vastly different in makeup and running style, gel to the point where each gets 900 yards? Then we can go say "see, same thing".

Why hasn't Seattle just elevated Robert Turbin and Christine Michael and dumped an expensive Marshawn Lynch and just used the two equals one approach?

And that's a valid point.

I think you're going to see the Cowboys settle on a combination of backs where the top guy is used more like Lynch (280 carries a season) as opposed to the almost 400 that Murray had.

Even if Murray stuck around he wasn't going to be used like that again this season.

 

[VACowboy]

So we will have two backs, probably vastly different in makeup and running style, gel to the point where each gets 900 yards? Then we can go say "see, same thing".

Why hasn't Seattle just elevated Robert Turbin and Christine Michael and dumped an expensive Marshawn Lynch and just used the two equals one approach?

Were you the guy who pointed out the Peter King article to me re: Richard Sherman's distaste of seeing Murray coming at him for four quarters?

IMHO, Seattle held onto Lynch because he is their offense and they can't come close to the same success without him. We can all debate whether the same applies to the Dallas O until we're silver and blue in the face. The difference between the teams is that Seattle features a championship defense and can afford to dump a big chunk of change in the RB position, and the Cowboys aren't in any position remotely resembling that. Plus, I think Marshawn Lynch is just better than Murray.

@everyone:

So, who are the best 4-5 RBs in the draft? Gurley, Gordon and Coleman, I assume. Who are the other two?

I know a lot of folks love Ajayi, but I just don't see it. I do like Yeldon a lot. Abdullah?

The two guys I'd like to see behind the Dallas OL are Duke Johnson and David Cobb. Are they considered players we'd settle for later on and who many posters here would be disappointed with?

My opinion on Murray is this: He was a great RB for us. He ran over and through defenders for four quarters, picked up the dirty yards. And like most everyone here, I believe replacing a workhorse like that will not be easy. But I also believe Murray created a lot of dirty yards himself because he wasn't good at seeing running lanes develop and was neither quick nor elusive enough to take full advantage of the ones he did see. So while we may not be able to replace what he gave the offense, I'd be eager to see what happens when we put a guy back there with speed and vision.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

They have no shot at Gurley, but I lay odds that people will end up being very happy with what Gordon, Jay Ajayi or T.J. Yeldon could do in this offense.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

Funny reading those draft reports on Murray. Both saying he went down easy and had no leg drive...and as a pro he was a beast, always falling forward and moving the pile. In addition the one said he couldn't pass protect and in reality he was very good at it.

The point is, these draft profiles aren't fact, they are opinion and oft times they are based on faulty data. As we all know now, if there was a redraft Murray would be in the top 10 most likely.

The real reason Murray was drafted in the 3rd was mainly because of the injury concerns. His production and athletic ability had first rounder written all over it.

We just might find out one of these second or third round backs has been downgraded in the same fashion Murray has been.

 

[BlindFaith]

Were you the guy who pointed out the Peter King article to me re: Richard Sherman's distaste of seeing Murray coming at him for four quarters?

IMHO, Seattle held onto Lynch because he is their offense and they can't come close to the same success without him. We can all debate whether the same applies to the Dallas O until we're silver and blue in the face. The difference between the teams is that Seattle features a championship defense and can afford to dump a big chunk of change in the RB position, and the Cowboys aren't in any position remotely resembling that. Plus, I think Marshawn Lynch is just better than Murray.

@everyone:

So, who are the best 4-5 RBs in the draft? Gurley, Gordon and Coleman, I assume. Who are the other two?

I know a lot of folks love Ajayi, but I just don't see it. I do like Yeldon a lot. Abdullah?

The two guys I'd like to see behind the Dallas OL are Duke Johnson and David Cobb. Are they considered players we'd settle for later on and who many posters here would be disappointed with?

My opinion on Murray is this: He was a great RB for us. He ran over and through defenders for four quarters, picked up the dirty yards. And like most everyone here, I believe replacing a workhorse like that will not be easy. But I also believe Murray created a lot of dirty yards himself because he wasn't good at seeing running lanes develop and was neither quick nor elusive enough to take full advantage of the ones he did see. So while we may not be able to replace what he gave the offense, I'd be eager to see what happens when we put a guy back there with speed and vision.

Gurley

Coleman
Duke Johnson
Langford
Gordon

Allen
Ajayi
Mike Davis
Abdullah

Yeldon
David Johnson

 

[reddyuta]

RB is the one position i am least worried about.I just want an all round back who we dont have to take off on passing downs and we should be good,there a bunch of them in this draft who can really pile up big yards behind our Oline.

 

[Alexander]

RB is the one position i am least worried about.I just want an all round back who we dont have to take off on passing downs and we should be good,there a bunch of them in this draft who can really pile up big yards behind our Oline.

A lot of us want the same thing for the most part. What I don't want is some mishmash combination of the incumbents and a third tier back thinking they can just combine for 1800 yards and it is exactly the same.