Rushing to help the Defense

[Kaiser]

With this offensive line, if the idea was simply to continue what we did with Murray, we could have taken a back in the middle rounds.

They tried that last year with a middle round pick. His name was Joseph Randle, or as he is known today - Kansas Corrections Inmate #2387467.

 

[Idgit]

IDC what anybody on this site says about stats on rushing in reguards to winning, because clearly Dallas taking Zeke at 4 says to don't buy into that thinking. Teams were so scared of the run game in 2014 that they would like up 8 in the box risking the single outside. This team know how to kill the clock

I think you're right that the Cowboys don't necessarily buy into that line of thinking. Though EE's going to be useful in pass protection and in passing routes, as well. But most of us who don't worry too much about who's rushing the ball as long as he doesn't fumble and we can cover short yardage and goal line situations also happen to think Elliott was a bad tactical pick for those same reasons. Give me the defender at #4 overall, or a move back for a different couple of defenders and let's take the RB in the 3rd round and let that guy compete for ORoY honors as far as I'm concerned.

The 2014 team was a lot more than just running game. Though the running success did setup advantageous passing situations, there are a lot of different ways to get advantageous passing situations. Where we're hurting is with the overall defensive talent. The smart move with address that with the best resources we've got in order to add players at those positions that are hardest to fill. And then to fill the easier positions with the less valuable picks as we work our way down the board.

But whatever. It's done. I can get on board with it and hope it pans out, or stage a sit in and complain about it for 4 years. Let's hope it turns out to be an amazing pick that changes everybody's perspectives on taking RBs at the very top of the first round.

 

[Idgit]

They tried that last year with a middle round pick. His name was Joseph Randle, or as he is known today - Kansas Corrections Inmate #2387467.

That's not really fair. Randle was productive for where he was picked. Remember the the ATL game? He had some issues, but he also gave us some big plays early in the year before his wheels fell off.

His issues were mental/emotional and have pretty obviously been getting progressively worse with each passing season. It's tough to say what's going on there, but it's not normal.

 

[Kaiser]

That's not really fair. Randle was productive for where he was picked.

He was productive for where he was picked, even with him going nuts he was still good value for a 5th round pick.

But he wasn't the answer at the position - which was the point Percy was making. Randle was a good 3rd down back who shouldn't have been starting, making him the starter wasn't the answer in the short term or the long term.

 

[Idgit]

He was productive for where he was picked, even with him going nuts he was still good value for a 5th round pick.

But he wasn't the answer at the position - which was the point Percy was making. Randle was a good 3rd down back who shouldn't have been starting, making him the starter wasn't the answer in the short term or the long term.

It's hard to say, because I think he was in the process of going crazy when he was here. That stuff with him sticking out the ball at the goal line and getting him in hot water with the staff and him being not-very-apologetic about it, for example. But yeah, he was a guy capable of competing for a starting job and not necessarily the guy you want to win it.

But if Romo had stayed in the lineup and Dunbar was there all year, I think our RB situation would have been surprisingly productive for us in 2015. Even with Romo and Dez and Dunbar out and Randle going looney we saw McFadden do ok against a lot of running fronts

 

[Nightman]

They tried that last year with a middle round pick. His name was Joseph Randle, or as he is known today - Kansas Corrections Inmate #2387467.

The myth of the late round RB star is just that

over the last 30 years almost all of the top 25 RBs were drafted in the 1st round, a few 2nd and 3rds and if you want to count some shorter career guys like TDavis-6th, PHolmes-UD and AFoster-UD you can but the studs are drafted early just like every other position

 

[wileedog]

The myth of the late round RB star is just that

over the last 30 years almost all of the top 25 RBs were drafted in the 1st round, a few 2nd and 3rds and if you want to count some shorter career guys like TDavis-6th, PHolmes-UD and AFoster-UD you can but the studs are drafted early just like every other position

And yet a 3rd round pick holds the single season rushing record for this franchise running behind this line.

Heck a washed up McFadden probably would have led the league behind this line last year if they hadn't farted around with an obvious headcase in Randle.

 

[Nightman]

And yet a 3rd round pick holds the single season rushing record for this franchise running behind this line.

Heck a washed up McFadden probably would have led the league behind this line last year if they hadn't farted around with an obvious headcase in Randle.

A third round pick isn't a late pick and he only fell because of a knee injury but even a 3rd is an outlier in the top 25 RBs

 

[wileedog]

A third round pick isn't a late pick and he only fell because of a knee injury but even a 3rd is an outlier in the top 25 RBs

Percy said "middle rounds" which is pretty much by definition the 3rd round. And why he fell is irrelevant, find someone else who 'falls' to the 3rd.

And its not as big an outlier as you are making it out to be. Of the top 25 RBs in rushing yards last year only 7 of them were taken in the first round. 3 were completely undrafted.

Only 1 was taken with a top 5 pick - our own Mr. McFadden, and his career is pretty much considered a bust.

Even arguably he two best RBs in the league right now, AP and Gurley, fell out of the top 5.

That's a huge, huge expenditure to get production out of a position we were already way above league average with while manning it with much less expensive options.

 

[percyhoward]

They tried that last year with a middle round pick. His name was Joseph Randle.

Is your point that another mid-round RB would have been another head case, or that he would have caused Romo to miss this season?

 

[Nightman]

Percy said "middle rounds" which is pretty much by definition the 3rd round. And why he fell is irrelevant, find someone else who 'falls' to the 3rd.

And its not as big an outlier as you are making it out to be. Of the top 25 RBs in rushing yards last year only 7 of them were taken in the first round. 3 were completely undrafted.

Only 1 was taken with a top 5 pick - our own Mr. McFadden, and his career is pretty much considered a bust.

Even arguably he two best RBs in the league right now, AP and Gurley, fell out of the top 5.

That's a huge, huge expenditure to get production out of a position we were already way above league average with while manning it with much less expensive options.

last year was one of the worst years on record for starting RBs...that is why McFadden's 4th place finish is so diminished....it wouldn't even be int he top 10 in 2014 or 2013....using one year's worth of data is a severely SSS..that is why I went back 20 and 30 years

That fact is if you want a star RB you have to pay for it just like every other position...just like Doug Free isn't as good as his OL mates...we paid a high price to get the best C, LT, RG and got a huge gift at LG

http://www.pro-football-reference.c...ft_pos=s&draft_pos=db&draft_pos=k&draft_pos=p

 

[wileedog]

last year was one of the worst years on record for starting RBs...that is why McFadden's 4th place finish is so diminished....it wouldn't even be int he top 10 in 2014 or 2013....using one year's worth of data is a severely SSS..that is why I went back 20 and 30 years

It was completely different game 30 years ago. Who cares how you got good RBs in 1986?

That fact is if you want a star RB you have to pay for it just like every other position...just like Doug Free isn't as good as his OL mates...we paid a high price to get the best C, LT, RG and got a huge gift at LG

And the other fact is we have already proven two years in a row that we can be among the best rushing teams in the league without having a "star" RB that we paid a premium price for.

Yeah we paid a huge price for the Oline, and part of the return for having paid for that stud Oline is not having to blow a top 4 pick on a flipping RB that in this day and age, unlike perhaps 1986, you can find pretty easily in the 2nd or 3rd.

 

[Sydla]

Even the best teams don't have stars at every position. In today's NFL you have to build a roster efficiently knowing that you are constrained by the realities that you can't pay for everyone and you can't have a star at every position. Super Bowl winners don't even have stars at every position.

IMO taking Elliott at 4 when you very likely could get top level production from your running game with the OL you had without investing a 4th pick in a TB was just a questionable move by the Cowboys.

 

[wileedog]

last year was one of the worst years on record for starting RBs...

BTW in 2014 exactly 1 RB in the top 10 rushers was taken in the 1st round - Marshawn Lynch. And 1 was undrafted, Arian Foster.

But I guess that year just sucked for RBs too.

 

[Nightman]

It was completely different game 30 years ago. Who cares how you got good RBs in 1986?



And the other fact is we have already proven two years in a row that we can be among the best rushing teams in the league without having a "star" RB that we paid a premium price for.

Yeah we paid a huge price for the Oline, and part of the return for having paid for that stud Oline is not having to blow a top 4 pick on a flipping RB that in this day and age, unlike perhaps 1986, you can find pretty easily in the 2nd or 3rd.

...
You can't argue the facts so you attack the method.....going back 30 years just insures more data.....and nothing has changed regarding running the ball......you are either a star or not......Emmitt would get as many yards today that he got in the 90s and Adrian Peterson would have been a star in 1986....

Look at the list again and tell me it is not weighted heavily towards the 1st round
http://www.pro-football-reference.c...ft_pos=s&draft_pos=db&draft_pos=k&draft_pos=p

 

[wileedog]

...
You can't argue the facts so you attack the method.....going back 30 years just insures more data.....and nothing has changed regarding running the ball......you are either a star or not......Emmitt would get as many yards today that he got in the 90s and Adrian Peterson would have been a star in 1986....

Look at the list again and tell me it is not weighted heavily towards the 1st round

I'm talking about the current state of the game, when colleges are pumping out NFL level talent at RB like candy. Why do you think so many teams have stopped taking RBs in the first?

I really don't care about talent acquisition past maybe 10 years ago. The game is different. The college talent is different. The obvious risks of injuries and short shelf life of RBs nowadays getting pummeled by 265 lb LBers who can run a 4.5 40 all makes the game and the value at the position different.

I'm showing you recent years data because that is what is relevant. The fact is in recent years the lists of top RBs in the league are completely littered with players not selected with top picks. You can either accept that is the state of league now or keep waving about lists of ancient history.

And you keep ignoring the point I am making anyway. This team does not absolutely need a top 25 of all time RB who is destined for a bust in Canton. We have already show two years running that we can produce a high level rushing attack with a league average RB. Finding someone simply better than Darren McFadden improves the team, and could be done pretty easily without blowing a top 4 pick.

 

[Nightman]

It was completely different game 30 years ago. Who cares how you got good RBs in 1986?



And the other fact is we have already proven two years in a row that we can be among the best rushing teams in the league without having a "star" RB that we paid a premium price for.

Yeah we paid a huge price for the Oline, and part of the return for having paid for that stud Oline is not having to blow a top 4 pick on a flipping RB that in this day and age, unlike perhaps 1986, you can find pretty easily in the 2nd or 3rd.

I'm talking about the current state of the game, when colleges are pumping out NFL level talent at RB like candy. Why do you think so many teams have stopped taking RBs in the first?

I really don't care about talent acquisition past maybe 10 years ago. The game is different. The college talent is different. The obvious risks of injuries and short shelf life of RBs nowadays getting pummeled by 265 lb LBers who can run a 4.5 40 all makes the game and the value at the position different.

I'm showing you recent years data because that is what is relevant. The fact is in recent years the lists of top RBs in the league are completely littered with players not selected with top picks. You can either accept that is the state of league now or keep waving about lists of ancient history.

And you keep ignoring the point I am making anyway. This team does not absolutely need a top 25 of all time RB who is destined for a bust in Canton. We have already show two years running that we can produce a high level rushing attack with a league average RB. Finding someone simply better than Darren McFadden improves the team, and could be done pretty easily without blowing a top 4 pick.

you are just wrong.....RB is like every other position....you can Wentz/Goff or you can get Dak

you can get TSmith or CGreen.....you can get Dez or DStreet....BJones or JJWilcox

You can get EElliott or JRandle

 

[Nightman]

I'm talking about the current state of the game, when colleges are pumping out NFL level talent at RB like candy. Why do you think so many teams have stopped taking RBs in the first?

I really don't care about talent acquisition past maybe 10 years ago. The game is different. The college talent is different. The obvious risks of injuries and short shelf life of RBs nowadays getting pummeled by 265 lb LBers who can run a 4.5 40 all makes the game and the value at the position different.

I'm showing you recent years data because that is what is relevant. The fact is in recent years the lists of top RBs in the league are completely littered with players not selected with top picks. You can either accept that is the state of league now or keep waving about lists of ancient history.

And you keep ignoring the point I am making anyway. This team does not absolutely need a top 25 of all time RB who is destined for a bust in Canton. We have already show two years running that we can produce a high level rushing attack with a league average RB. Finding someone simply better than Darren McFadden improves the team, and could be done pretty easily without blowing a top 4 pick.

You can't judge a career on one season

 

[wileedog]

you are just wrong.....RB is like every other position....you can Wentz/Goff or you can get Dak

you can get TSmith or CGreen.....you can get Dez or DStreet....BJones or JJWilcox

You can get EElliott or JRandle

Or I can get Le'Veon Bell or LeSean McCoy or Matt Forte or Jamaal Charles or (non-fat) Eddy Lacy or an absolute host of other talented backs that would be stars behind this line without using a top 4 pick.

Heck maybe I will find a guy in the third who can run behind this line and get 1800 yards. Its been known to happen.

 

[Idgit]

...
You can't argue the facts so you attack the method.....going back 30 years just insures more data.....and nothing has changed regarding running the ball......you are either a star or not......Emmitt would get as many yards today that he got in the 90s and Adrian Peterson would have been a star in 1986....

Look at the list again and tell me it is not weighted heavily towards the 1st round

The best player list of all time--at any position--is going to be heavily weighted towards first round selections. Because that stands to reason because truly stand-out players at any position are going to be taken in the top 32. The same thing would be true for OGs and Ss and even Kickers and Punters. The highest ones taken are more likely to be the best players.

But that's not the question. Adrian Peterson might be the best back currently active right now. But that doesn't mean guys like Lesean McCoy or Le'veon Bell or Frank Gore or Arian Foster or Alfred Morris or Demarco Murray can't be found at better value picks all around him. If it turns out we drafted the next Adrian Peterson at #4, I don't think any of us will be complaining. If instead we get a guy who's comparable to other talented players that are picked outside of the first round on down with some regularity, then it's just not an efficient use of resources.