SI: "His absence could wound this club more deeply than it realizes."

[Dave_in-NC]

Ouch!

Too rich for my blood!

What is the length of contract you were thinking?

Four years. But again, wouldn't there be ways to make that more team friendly? Even an out after say three? I don't do the cap, to confusing for me.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

All reports have Indy as the top suitor and the cap to pay him what he wants.

Then CYA Murray. I will wish him a great career.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I like MURRAY but this was the first season he was healthy. I don't liek it or trust it. If it was a fair deal for us Id welcome him back but if it's over 7.5 a year. I and just like others won't be happy.

I'd like to keep the band together to see if they can take care of unfinished business.... $7 seems a bit high.

Meh... It's a gamble either keep or let go... Taking a chance.

 

[Stash]

Four years. But again, wouldn't there be ways to make that more team friendly? Even an out after say three? I don't do the cap, to confusing for me.

Yeah, there are always ways to 'massage the cap' but it inevitably involves kicking the can down the road.

But I have essentially the same plan regarding any possible deal for Adrian Peterson. His deal would likely read like a 4 or 5 year deal but actually be for two or three with expected dead money afterwards.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Yeah, there are always ways to 'massage the cap' but it inevitably involves kicking the can down the road.

But I have essentially the same plan regarding any possible deal for Adrian Peterson. His deal would likely read like a 4 or 5 year deal but actually be for two or three with expected dead money afterwards.

At 27 Murray isn't going to be on the team in four years. That's how I see it any way. I like young RBs.

 

[CowboyGil]

I just feel like the one thing about you Murray you can't replace are his intangibles. You already have a knucklehead on the roster in Randle. You want to trade for another one in Peterson. Or draft a rookie with the potential but no NFL proof. Murray is quiet, unassuming and has had no drama issues off the field. He's a known quantity. I know you add and subtract guys every off season, but not at key positions like Murray's.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

I just feel like the one thing about you Murray you can't replace are his intangibles. You already have a knucklehead on the roster in Randle. You want to trade for another one in Peterson. Or draft a rookie with the potential but no NFL proof. Murray is quiet, unassuming and has had no drama issues off the field. He's a known quantity. I know you add and subtract guys every off season, but not at key positions like Murray's.

I agree with all of that. But you can only pay what you can pay. Hopefully they work out a deal they are both happy with.

 

[Doomsday101]

I agree with all of that. But you can only pay what you can pay. Hopefully they work out a deal they are both happy with.

I agree. I'm a big fan of Murray and want him back but there are limits to what I think Dallas should do contract wise. My hope is Dallas is willing to offer a fair and competitive contract meaning I do not expect the money that the top 5 RB are getting I do expect them to offer a deal between 6 and 7 mill.

 

[CowboyGil]

I agree with all of that. But you can only pay what you can pay. Hopefully they work out a deal they are both happy with.

Agreed. No more than 7 mil per. 4 years max with the option to walk away after 3.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I think you couldn't be more wrong. "It is just that the fans here seem to think of him as a one-year wonder."
Not just anyone could step in and do what he did. But I can list at least 5 backs that would have put up more yds and TDs and another 5 that could match him easily. The common misconception is that Murray made yards out of nothing. Reality is when he didn't have this line he was mediocre at best and his best 2 games came against an awful Rams team. Before this season guys like Terrell Davis made valid points that Murray runs to darkness and far too often turns out of bounds.

I like Murray. However, he's nothing more than an above average back. He has health issues and has only produced once the line improved. He's just not special. That's why he's not worth more than 6 million a season.

Frankly he never played through injuries until his contract year. He was the same way in college too.

The McCoy trade should tell every Cowboy fan how most teams value the RB position now. It's a devalued position that you can generally fix late in the draft.

duely noted, RBs half skills that can be plugged or unplugged anywhere.
OK, i and meine big brains better already

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I just feel like the one thing about you Murray you can't replace are his intangibles. You already have a knucklehead on the roster in Randle. You want to trade for another one in Peterson. Or draft a rookie with the potential but no NFL proof. Murray is quiet, unassuming and has had no drama issues off the field. He's a known quantity. I know you add and subtract guys every off season, but not at key positions like Murray's.

i could not half said better. If i win the lottery i will make you meine PR advance person.

 

[CowboyGil]

i could not half said better. If i win the lottery i will make you meine PR advance person.

Duly noted!

 

[KalEl]

i could not half said better. If i win the lottery i will make you meine PR advance person.

You spell check sucks! LOL

 

[Verdict]

I understand the line of thought that says he is a key piece of the puzzle and wanted back by the team. I get that but honestly, I don't really buy into it here. As I see it, all of these guys are Pros and regardless of who gets signed and who does not, you had better not be worried about who gets signed, or not, because next season, you are getting paid on how well YOU play. Don't worry about the other guy, you worry about how you are handling your own business.

The other thing I believe is that our investment in the OL is not worth much if we are drafting 3 guys in the 1st round and that talent only works if you have one certain guy carrying the rock. The idea that the Cowboys make the investment in the OL is to provide the team with the ability to be less reliant on skilled position players. I think this is pretty key in this evaluation. We better be able to run the ball with backs other then just Murray.

I don't understand this line of thinking at all. If you apply this rationale to DeMarco, then you can also say Dez gets all his catches because the QB has time to throw the ball to him. Or Romo is only good because he has time to throw. Or if the guys weren't blocking inside then Jason Witten wouldn't be catching passes, he would be blocking. Therefore, we really don't need to pay for ANY skill positions on offense because our line is so dominant. We all know that this sort of idea is a fallacy, but for some reason, it seems to stick when it pertains to DeMarco.

Thinking running backs are plug and play is pretty absurd to me. Everyone thought Troy Hambrick was, at one time, considered to be the next best thing to sliced bread, before they made him the starter. You might be able to get a guy who is able to replace DeMarco in the draft, or free agency, but in my estimation there aren't that many that can do what he does and none of them come cheaply, or without risk.

If this team was in rebuilding mode, I think your line of thinking would have more validity. With Romo's window of opportunity nearing the latter stages, that is personally a chance that I would not take, unless it was cost prohibitive.

 

[Verdict]

I still take issue with all his fumbles. If you've watched enough Cowboys games this past year, you have to wonder how he didn't fumble more times than he actually did. I still stand at 50% of me says let him walk with a big contract and a ton of wear and tear this past year somewhere else, and 50% of me want's him to stay.

I think that is a pretty fair statement of how a lot of us feel. As much as I like DeMarco, his fumbles are a legitimate issue of concern.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

You spell check sucks! LOL

Do not blame the victem. blame the Farmers Branch/Carrollton school district for using teachers from rural Ohio.

 

[Verdict]

There are significant risks to keeping Murray also.
1. Murray has only played 16 games once and that was in 2014.
2. Murray was over used in 2014. The history of RBs with that many touches in not good in following years.
3. If it prevents them from getting the pass rusher they need then it's a big risk that they can find one. The probability of William/Randle and a draft pick producing is much higher than the probability of a rookie pass rusher producing. Depending on the rookie pass rusher represents a risk.

That is obviously the other side of the risk coin, and are legitimate concerns. I think that what the team has to decide is "what exact dollar amount they have to pay DeMarco shifts the risk from one side of the ledger to the other". Getting the right answer to this question is inexact and required some degree of speculation, but getting it right puts the team way ahead, and getting it wrong sets them back substantially.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

I still take issue with all his fumbles. If you've watched enough Cowboys games this past year, you have to wonder how he didn't fumble more times than he actually did. I still stand at 50% of me says let him walk with a big contract and a ton of wear and tear this past year somewhere else, and 50% of me want's him to stay.

You seem torn. When I am 50 purcent sure and 50 purcent unsure I flip a coin. Or I say to meineself: "What would Rutger Hauer do?" Or I offer one side a donut so maybe i kin get a 51/49 split and then do what half to be done. It work for me!

 

[Doomsday101]

I don't understand this line of thinking at all. If you apply this rationale to DeMarco, then you can also say Dez gets all his catches because the QB has time to throw the ball to him. Or Romo is only good because he has time to throw. Or if the guys weren't blocking inside then Jason Witten wouldn't be catching passes, he would be blocking. Therefore, we really don't need to pay for ANY skill positions on offense because our line is so dominant. We all know that this sort of idea is a fallacy, but for some reason, it seems to stick when it pertains to DeMarco.

Thinking running backs are plug and play is pretty absurd to me. Everyone thought Troy Hambrick was, at one time, considered to be the next best thing to sliced bread, before they made him the starter. You might be able to get a guy who is able to replace DeMarco in the draft, or free agency, but in my estimation there aren't that many that can do what he does and none of them come cheaply, or without risk.

If this team was in rebuilding mode, I think your line of thinking would have more validity. With Romo's window of opportunity nearing the latter stages, that is personally a chance that I would not take, unless it was cost prohibitive.

I fully agree. To those who say Demarco benefited because of the OL well there is truth in that but then the same can be said for all skill position players on this team that they too benefited because the OL was able to do their job. Murray was not the only guy who prospered because of the play along the OL. Murray still lead the league in yards after contact those are the yards he had to fight for on his own and did so better than any back out there.

 

[Jarv]

4 Years a 4 million per is as high as I would go at the position. No disrespect to Murray, but I'll go with Williams, Randle and whoever else we pickup. Too many past injuries and fumbles, hate to overpay a guy who has a banner contract year. I look at what they have done in "non-contract" years myself.