RB Tandem Stats (NFC)

[Vintage]

our rushing game became a non factor, because of the defense. When the defense is steadily letting teams control the clock, and score. You don't have alot of time to run the ball.

Against Philly, Jones had 10 carries for 38 yards while Barber had 6 carries for 3 yards.

Against Detroit, Jones had 10 carries for 27 yards and Barber had 7 carries for 15 yards.

In both games, when they did run the ball, they got no production.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I don't know if I would want to sacrafice less y.p.c. for that though.... our running game struggled at times (especially down the stretch).

And since apparently that is the cause of Romo struggling down the stretch - or so I am told - then I am not sure I want to risk that.

But yeah, our backs need to factor more into the running game than they currently do.

I would trade 200 yards of rushing (giving 1500+) for Jackson/Davis production of 600+ MORE recieving yards. To have more versatile running backs spreads defenses out more making your offense flow better.

It's in my opinion to have someone who is good all around than have someone who great at only one thing. (btw, Jones does nothing great)

 

[Stautner]

I haven't hailed anyone.

So don't compile my opinion into others, and then use that as a basis to knock down my post.

Against Philly, Jones had 10 carries for 38 yards while Barber had 6 carries for 3 yards.

Against Detroit, Jones had 10 carries for 27 yards and Barber had 7 carries for 15 yards.

In both games, when they did run the ball, they got no production.

Also keep in mind that IF we had ben able to control the clock with OUR running game - something Parcells likes to do - then their offense would have had fewer opportunities to do the same.

Bottom line is that blaming the defense is an overly simplistic view.

 

[Vintage]

I would trade 200 yards of rushing (giving 1500+) for Jackson/Davis production of 600+ MORE recieving yards. To have more versatile running backs spreads defenses out more making your offense flow better.

It's in my opinion to have someone who is good all around than have someone who great at only one thing. (btw, Jones does nothing great)

Oh yeah, I'd sacrafice for that. I was talking about yards per carry though. I wouldn't sacrafice the extra recieving yards, for say, sub 4 yards per carry...

We don't need the Lions rushing attack

(Not saying you were implying that, but you did say yards per carry you'd sacrafice...)

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I would like to see more receptions from our RBs. That means Jones must go. Maybe not this season, but next.

It's hard to know if it's our RBs ability to catch the ball or our offense. You figure, we like to run a balanced offense so your only going to get so many receptions combined.

With Glenn, Owens, Crayton, Witten and Fasano, there are not going to be a lot of balls for the RBs, unless we take throws away from them. I guess I'd have to see how many drops our backs had before I could make any intelligent detrmination on there ability to improve on there pass catching numbers. I do agree thou, seems as if Jones should be able to catch more then just 9 balls all season. In 05, he had 35 catches and in his injury shortened rookie year, he had 17. 9 seems real low indeed.

 

[YosemiteSam]

With Glenn, Owens, Crayton, Witten and Fasano, there are not going to be a lot of balls for the RBs, unless we take throws away from them.

If the rumblings are true, we will see more screens and swing passes this year.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If the rumblings are true, we will see more screens and swing passes this year.

Could be. We used a lot of that with Emmitt and Moose back in the day. I could see it.

 

[firehawk350]

Dude, he had like 3300 total yards in 2004 and 2005.

Has it been that long since Portis was thought of as a top 5 back like he was going into 2006? An injury and that's it, he's now not any better then average and you wouldn't take him if he was given? Okay...

 

[Vintage]

Has it been that long since Portis was thought of as a top 5 back like he was going into 2006? An injury and that's it, he's now not any better then average and you wouldn't take him if he was given? Okay...

He was defending Portis.

 

[Hostile]

Has it been that long since Portis was thought of as a top 5 back like he was going into 2006? An injury and that's it, he's now not any better then average and you wouldn't take him if he was given? Okay...

I never considered him a top 5 back. Top 10? Yes.

This is no different than any other RB though. News kids on the block move even the best ones down the ladder a bit.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I would like to see more receptions from our RBs. That means Jones must go. Maybe not this season, but next.

He actually stepped up his receiving quite a bit and was effective in the open field. But for some reason Parcells decided to cut down on his screens in 2006.




YAKUZA

 

[joseephuss]

I would like to see more receptions from our RBs. That means Jones must go. Maybe not this season, but next.

It seemed the offense was geared toward getting the ball down field and not to the running back. That is why Romo averaged high in yards per attempt.

Jones had 9 receptions for 142 yards(15.8 ypc) and Barber had 23 receptions for 196 yards(8.5 ypc) and 2 TDs. Barber is supposed to be the receiving back and why he comes in on 3rd downs and obvious passing situations, so it is no surprise that he has more receptions. Still low totals show that they really did not throw to either back a lot.

Portis and Betts make a formidable duo. I would take them both. Maybe not for their salaries though. They are both paid very well. Much more than Julius and Marion. That limits the quality depth at other positions because you have to save some money somewhere.

 

[YosemiteSam]

It seemed the offense was geared toward getting the ball down field and not to the running back. That is why Romo averaged high in yards per attempt.

Jones had 9 receptions for 142 yards(15.8 ypc) and Barber had 23 receptions for 196 yards(8.5 ypc) and 2 TDs. Barber is supposed to be the receiving back and why he comes in on 3rd downs and obvious passing situations, so it is no surprise that he has more receptions. Still low totals show that they really did not throw to either back a lot.

Well, word on the street is that Garrett is going to stretch the field this season. So, I don't know what that says about last season.

If you subtract Jones' sole long (39 yards) reception, he only averaged 4.68 ypc. It doesn't look quite so nice after that.

 

[joseephuss]

Well, word on the street is that Garrett is going to stretch the field this season. So, I don't know what that says about last season.

If you subtract Jones' sole long (39 yards) reception, he only averaged 4.68 ypc. It doesn't look quite so nice after that.

142-39 = 103
9-1 = 8
103/8 =12.8 ypc

I just posted their totals for others to see. Wasn't really doing it to make a comparison as to who was better. Barber appears more adept and receiving and that is one of the reasons he is the 3rd down back.

 

[Stautner]

Well, word on the street is that Garrett is going to stretch the field this season. So, I don't know what that says about last season.

If you subtract Jones' sole long (39 yards) reception, he only averaged 4.68 ypc. It doesn't look quite so nice after that.

I think this is just a mistaken impression that people have.

I think people have mistaken the discussion about Garrett wanting to spread the ball around as meaning we are "open up the offense" in terms of throwing downfield more.

I fully expect Garrett to use a creative offense that utilizes RB's, FB's, H-Backs, TE's and WR's ...... spread the ball around to ALL options - then take his shots downfield at the right times - particularly when defenses sneak up to stop the run or the short/intermediate passing game.

We aren't talking about a vertical passing game like Zampese used with Fouts in the 1970's.

 

[Stash]

I would like to see more receptions from our RBs. That means Jones must go. Maybe not this season, but next.

That stat stood out to me as well. I think that's an area where the Cowboys offense could and should improve.

In my opinion, part of having a complete offense if having as many 'threats' as you can for defenses to worry about.

And part of that includes passes to the running backs (and fullback too).

 

[YosemiteSam]

142-39 = 103
9-1 = 8
103/8 =12.8 ypc

I just posted their totals for others to see. Wasn't really doing it to make a comparison as to who was better. Barber appears more adept and receiving and that is one of the reasons he is the 3rd down back.

Ahh, I misread. I thought it said he had 23 receptions.

 

[joseephuss]

That stat stood out to me as well. I think that's an area where the Cowboys offense could and should improve.

In my opinion, part of having a complete offense if having as many 'threats' as you can for defenses to worry about.

And part of that includes passes to the running backs (and fullback too).

It was two extremes under Parcells. Richie Anderson set franchise records for receptions by a full back in 2003 and then the full back became a non-factor after that.

 

[joseephuss]

Ahh, I misread. I thought it said he had 23 receptions.

I misread stuff all the time.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I think this is just a mistaken impression that people have.

I think people have mistaken the discussion about Garrett wanting to spread the ball around as meaning we are "open up the offense" in terms of throwing downfield more.

I fully expect Garrett to use a creative offense that utilizes RB's, FB's, H-Backs, TE's and WR's ...... spread the ball around to ALL options - then take his shots downfield at the right times - particularly when defenses sneak up to stop the run or the short/intermediate passing game.

We aren't talking about a vertical passing game like Zampese used with Fouts in the 1970's.

Well, they said they were going to throw the ball down field much more than last year. They said TO and Glenn will attack defenses deep a lot more in 2007.