Randle says "Murray left a lot of meat on the bone"

[CT Dal Fan]

My take on this whole thing: Randle was trying to express confidence in himself more than he was trying to diss DeMarco Murray.

What was he supposed to say? I'll be lucky to get 600 yards but Murray is going to lead the Eagles to the Super Bowl? Personally, I like Randle's comment and his confidence. Put the pressure on yourself; young man, and live up to it.

 

[DFWJC]

Fwiw
I hear loose-lips Randal really does look great out there so far.
Just OTAs obviously, but they're saying he looks really explosive.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The issue isn't whether he left yards on the field. The issue is whether Randle should have said anything when he didn't get a chance to play and didn't even get a chance but to nibble at the bone.

And, yes, if you are the better back that means you're playing and able to eat more meat off the bone than a lesser back who only gets to nibble.

If you want more bites than beat me to the dinner table.



You left out a critical and crucial point. Jason Garrett has no business CRITICIZING Aikman's quarterback play because he couldn't beat out Troy Aikman.

It's one thing to discuss; it's quite another to criticize, especially when you can't beat out the person you think should be doing more.

I think it's silly that people can't understand this.

But Randle not getting a chance to play wasn't based on skill. When you have a player who you are heavily invested in that guy is going to get the nod over the younger player who was a 5th round pick. That's just how it is in the NFL.

And Jason Garrett can't criticize Aikman's quarterback play? That's silly. Why on earth can't he? So what makes us qualified as fans to criticize players?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Fwiw
I hear loose-lips Randal really does look great out there so far.
Just OTAs obviously, but they're saying he looks really explosive.

I personally believe Randle is the reason why they didn't draft a running back. I think they would've taken Gurley or Gordon if available but they were never drafting any of those other guys unless one of them like Ajaye had a massive fall to the 6th round or something along those lines.

But I personally believe the Cowboys have more faith in Randle than anyone else. I see the media sort of assuming its McFadden as the #1 but I believe he'll have a supporting role.

 

[Risen Star]

There were times where Murray left yards out there. Heck, just his new born foal impression in the open field does that. But there were also plenty of times where he should have gotten 3 and he got 5 or more.

I don't think he should have gotten more than the 1,800 yards he did. Randle is sort of a moron here.

 

[gimmesix]

Fwiw
I hear loose-lips Randal really does look great out there so far.
Just OTAs obviously, but they're saying he looks really explosive.

Explosive is not really the problem. Randle is right in that Murray left yards out there. I don't think anyone would try to refute that.

What he neglects to mention is the part that made Murray good, which is the area that is a concern with any of the backs we currently have. It's what Garrett called "dirty yards."

Sure, it will be great to have a back who can take full advantage of the well-blocked plays and big holes, but if we don't have any who can consistently break tackles when defenders get through or fight through when the hole isn't there, we won't be able to run the ball as much. Second-and-5 is a running or passing play. Second-and-11 is going to be a passing play most of the time.

So, yes, Murray left a lot of meat on the bone, but he was constantly chewing. Do we have anyone who can do that?

 

[gimmesix]

There were times where Murray left yards out there. Heck, just his new born foal impression in the open field does that. But there were also plenty of times where he should have gotten 3 and he got 5 or more.

I don't think he should have gotten more than the 1,800 yards he did. Randle is sort of a moron here.

Yes, a different back might have hit more home runs, but might not have rushed for 1,800 yards because of more runs for no gains or short gains that Murray turned into 3 to 5 yards.

One of the reasons Murray carried the ball as much as he did was that he kept picking up enough yards that Dallas could afford to hand it to him again instead of being forced to pass.

 

[Nightman]

Yes, a different back might have hit more home runs, but might not have rushed for 1,800 yards because of more runs for no gains or short gains that Murray turned into 3 to 5 yards.

One of the reasons Murray carried the ball as much as he did was that he kept picking up enough yards that Dallas could afford to hand it to him again instead of being forced to pass.

Reminds me of a story my Daddy used to tell me:

There were 2 bulls standing on top of a hill looking down on a herd of cows
The younger Bull says "let's run down and ......

I guess I cant tell the full story here but the idea is that Slow and Steady wins the race.

 

[tyke1doe]

But Randle not getting a chance to play wasn't based on skill. When you have a player who you are heavily invested in that guy is going to get the nod over the younger player who was a 5th round pick. That's just how it is in the NFL.

If it wasn't based on skill than what was it based on? Are you saying Randle was the better running back but the Cowboys didn't play him? That seems silly doesn't it.
It always is about skill. But let me define skill. Skill is the necessary attributes you need to get the job done. If a player is a fast runner but can't block and another player is slower but can, I would say the latter is more skilled at doing the job than the former. It doesn't matter whether it's a fifth rounder or a first rounder. Teams generally tend to play the guy who is most skilled regardless of draft round. At least, smart teams do.
I say Murray was more skilled than Randle because he had the necessary attributes/tools to get the job done moreso than Randle.

And Jason Garrett can't criticize Aikman's quarterback play? That's silly. Why on earth can't he? So what makes us qualified as fans to criticize players?

Huh?

Who said Garrett can't criticize Aikman? I said he has no business criticizing. And he has no business because he's competing with Aikman but can't win the starting job. Why is this the case? Well, if you're competing against someone for a position and you can't beat that person, what makes you qualified to criticize him/her?

As to your second question regarding what makes us qualified to criticize players? Who said we were qualified? There's a difference between criticizing and being qualified to criticize. Me thinks you interpreted my comments incorrectly.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Explosive is not really the problem. Randle is right in that Murray left yards out there. I don't think anyone would try to refute that.

What he neglects to mention is the part that made Murray good, which is the area that is a concern with any of the backs we currently have. It's what Garrett called "dirty yards."

Sure, it will be great to have a back who can take full advantage of the well-blocked plays and big holes, but if we don't have any who can consistently break tackles when defenders get through or fight through when the hole isn't there, we won't be able to run the ball as much. Second-and-5 is a running or passing play. Second-and-11 is going to be a passing play most of the time.

So, yes, Murray left a lot of meat on the bone, but he was constantly chewing. Do we have anyone who can do that?

Excellent analysis my friend..............................Randle is better in open space, I don't think anybody would argue differently, but that is not the main issue. The issue is "being a complete back" in that you not only can make big runs when you have a huge hole to run through, but you have to get the "dirty yards" as well. We are talking short yardage or when the defense gets penetration.

See, there were many times when the defense had the holes plugged and got good penetration and should have tackled Murray for a loss or no gain on the play. However, Murray had the power to lower his head and move the pile 3 yards instead of going down. That might not seem like much, but the difference between 2nd and 11 verses 2nd and 7 is HUGE in playcalling.

That is what we don't know if any of our backs can do...........get 3 yards own their own when they are first hit in the backfield................Murray did it routinely, we don't know about McFadden, Randle, Williams, Dunbar, ect.....

 

[big dog cowboy]

That is what we don't know if any of our backs can do...........get 3 yards own their own when they are first hit in the backfield................Murray did it routinely, we don't know about McFadden, Randle, Williams, Dunbar, ect.....

We may not know that but based on what I saw draft weekend the Cowboy FO feels like they know.

 

[JoeKing]

I particularly liked what Bryan Broaddus had to say on the subject. I'll second his thoughts on the matter and leave it at that.

Bryan Broaddus: I wrote for DallasCowboys.com on Thursday that I didn’t believe that Joseph Randle was out of line for his comments about DeMarco Murray and how there were snaps where he left yards on the field. Like Randle, I mean no disrespect to the type of season that Murray had, as well as his accomplishments. It was a remarkable year and no doubt will be remembered as one of the greats in Dallas Cowboys history. The point that Randle was making in my opinion was more about those runs where Murray was clear of the line and into the second level, only to be tackled before he had a chance to extend the carry. I studied the same film as Randle and said it to myself plenty of times: if Murray had more of a burst or long speed, his rushing totals would have been right there with the greatest of all-time. Both Randle and I are only commenting on what we had seen with our own eyes and for anyone to get knocked out of shape for those observations is truly missing the point. DeMarco Murray’s season was amazing in every sense of the word but it also could have been legendary.

 

[Beast_from_East]

We may not know that but based on what I saw draft weekend the Cowboy FO feels like they know.

Maybe.............however some of the beat writers have said that they talked to the coaches and scouts and that Dallas was going to draft a RB in the 2nd round but Gregory was still sitting there at pick 60 and he was just too good to pass up. By the time the 3rd round came, all the RBs still left did not represent a big enough difference over what we currently have on the roster.

So if this is true, the team felt that RB was a need but they just couldn't pass on a top flight pass rusher...................By the end of the 3rd round, nobody was left that would clearly be an upgrade over Randle, Williams, McFadden, ect.......

 

[DandyDon52]

murray responded by saying "he hopes randle gets a taste of that meat this year" 392 tastes, and see what he thinks then.