Smashing the "Murray Myths"

[plasticman]

First, let me explain the difference between myth and truth.

Myths almost always started from a truth that was blown to exaggeration. Throughout the ages the real story is not interesting or substantial enough to be of interest and so certain liberties are taken by the narrators. over time, these exaggerations replace the truth. The story is repeated so often that it is first accepted as the new truth. However, more time passes and the "enhancements" on the real story becomes so improbable that it becomes relegated to fiction.

We have reached this point when it comes to describing the career of DeMarco Murray thus far.

Myth #1:

"DeMarco Murray" is injury prone and has been since his college days."

Yes, Murray is "injury prone", in it's strictest definition. that is, he is prone to injury, there exists a probability that he could become injured again.

Newsflash!:

He's a running back! All running backs are prone to injury, they are constantly running full speed into a group of guys bigger then them. To us, a full game as a running back would be similar to experiencing 20 to 25 car wrecks. RB's get beat up, they get hurt, they become injured.

When you look at the top twenty active RB's in the league, there is not a single one that played in every game. Only 5 of them have missed less than 10 games. 12 of them have missed more than a seasons worth of games.

When you look at the missed games as a percentage of all possible games, DeMarco is in the middle of the top 20, missing 17.2% of his games.

By the way, Darren McFadden is the leader in games missed at 25.9%.

Ahmad Bradshaw, Arian Foster, Ryan Matthews, DeAngelo Williams, Reggie Bush and Fred Jackson have also been more "injury prone"

When you look at the top 50 backs in NFL history since the 16 game format, the average percentage of missed games is 13.3%. It may shock you to learn that the 2nd least injured top 50 RB was Eddie George....who carried the ball over 400 times in his fifth season....over 300 times in each of his 4 previous seasons and over 300 times in the 3 seasons following his 5th...but I'll get to the "workhorse season burnout" myth later.

But here is where a point needs to be made:

Only three of the top twenty active RB's have been more productive per season played than DeMarco Murray.

Translation:

Even if it is true than Murray is more injury prone than some of them, he is still more productive overall. An occasionally injured DeMarco Murray produces more than even the healthiest RB's in the league today.

When it comes to the perception that DeMarco Murray had an injury prone college career then I just have to ask how that could be possible when:

Since 2000 DeMarco Murray led all Oklahoma RB's in All Purpose TD's, 3rd in Big 12, 4th in the NCAA.

Since 2000 he leads all Oklahoma RB's in touches (combined carries and receptions), yards from scrimmage and TDs from scrimmage.

We are talking about a major college program known for running the ball. This isn't Alaska Junior College.

How can this be possible when the perception has been he spends a great deal of his time on the sidelines and in whirlpools during college?

How can it be possible that only two other Oklahoma players have been in more college games since 2000 than DeMarco Murray's 50? Murray missed 5 games, an average of a game a season. Go back and see how many college backs can play every game of the season. See how many can do it as a primary back for almost 4 full seasons.

In Murray's rookie season he ran behind an offensive line that started the season with only two players on the O-line that had previous starting experience with the Cowboys, Free and Kosier, former 4th and 7th round picks respectively.

The following year the Cowboys started all 5 O-linemen at positions they had never started as a Dallas Cowboy. It would be fair to say that Murray wasn't as much injury prone as he was exposed to danger.

With that said, DeMarco Murray ended his Cowboy career with 26 consecutive starts, the last being the divisional playoff game. During those 26 games he averaged over 100 yards per game rushing and 130 yards from scrimmage.

Next myth I expose:

"NFL RB's that carry the balls as many times as Murray did in 2014 typically burnout as a result and are never the same for the rest of their career."

 

[Corso]

Why are you talking about that Eagles player? Who cares anymore.

 

[CATCH17]

This belongs in the NFL Zone along with anything else involving the Eagles.

 

[xwalker]

First, let me explain the difference between myth and truth.

Myths almost always started from a truth that was blown to exaggeration. Throughout the ages the real story is not interesting or substantial enough to be of interest and so certain liberties are taken by the narrators. over time, these exaggerations replace the truth. The story is repeated so often that it is first accepted as the new truth. However, more time passes and the "enhancements" on the real story becomes so improbable that it becomes relegated to fiction.

We have reached this point when it comes to describing the career of DeMarco Murray thus far.

Myth #1:

"DeMarco Murray" is injury prone and has been since his college days."

Yes, Murray is "injury prone", in it's strictest definition. that is, he is prone to injury, there exists a probability that he could become injured again.

Newsflash!:

He's a running back! All running backs are prone to injury, they are constantly running full speed into a group of guys bigger then them. To us, a full game as a running back would be similar to experiencing 20 to 25 car wrecks. RB's get beat up, they get hurt, they become injured.

When you look at the top twenty active RB's in the league, there is not a single one that played in every game. Only 5 of them have missed less than 10 games. 12 of them have missed more than a seasons worth of games.

When you look at the missed games as a percentage of all possible games, DeMarco is in the middle of the top 20, missing 17.2% of his games.

By the way, Darren McFadden is the leader in games missed at 25.9%.

Ahmad Bradshaw, Arian Foster, Ryan Matthews, DeAngelo Williams, Reggie Bush and Fred Jackson have also been more "injury prone"

When you look at the top 50 backs in NFL history since the 16 game format, the average percentage of missed games is 13.3%. It may shock you to learn that the 2nd least injured top 50 RB was Eddie George....who carried the ball over 400 times in his fifth season....over 300 times in each of his 4 previous seasons and over 300 times in the 3 seasons following his 5th...but I'll get to the "workhorse season burnout" myth later.

But here is where a point needs to be made:

Only three of the top twenty active RB's have been more productive per season played than DeMarco Murray.

Translation:

Even if it is true than Murray is more injury prone than some of them, he is still more productive overall. An occasionally injured DeMarco Murray produces more than even the healthiest RB's in the league today.

When it comes to the perception that DeMarco Murray had an injury prone college career then I just have to ask how that could be possible when:

Since 2000 DeMarco Murray led all Oklahoma RB's in All Purpose TD's, 3rd in Big 12, 4th in the NCAA.

Since 2000 he leads all Oklahoma RB's in touches (combined carries and receptions), yards from scrimmage and TDs from scrimmage.

We are talking about a major college program known for running the ball. This isn't Alaska Junior College.

How can this be possible when the perception has been he spends a great deal of his time on the sidelines and in whirlpools during college?

How can it be possible that only two other Oklahoma players have been in more college games since 2000 than DeMarco Murray's 50? Murray missed 5 games, an average of a game a season. Go back and see how many college backs can play every game of the season. See how many can do it as a primary back for almost 4 full seasons.

In Murray's rookie season he ran behind an offensive line that started the season with only two players on the O-line that had previous starting experience with the Cowboys, Free and Kosier, former 4th and 7th round picks respectively.

The following year the Cowboys started all 5 O-linemen at positions they had never started as a Dallas Cowboy. It would be fair to say that Murray wasn't as much injury prone as he was exposed to danger.

With that said, DeMarco Murray ended his Cowboy career with 26 consecutive starts, the last being the divisional playoff game. During those 26 games he averaged over 100 yards per game rushing and 130 yards from scrimmage.

Next myth I expose:

"NFL RB's that carry the balls as many times as Murray did in 2014 typically burnout as a result and are never the same for the rest of their career."

Newsflash: Murray is an Eagle now. Let it go. Move on.

 

[TrailBlazer]

Good for you.

How many times in his career has he played a full season?

He was a product of the oline and that's it.

 

[CF74]

I'm sure we will have some drives stall out but they will adjust. Murray was special in that often he made something out of nothing by running over a defender in the backfield. But by that same token he often left a lot of yds on the field.

I believe we will get bye and see a lot more home runs from the trio of backs we go with.. There will be those tough games where Murray's dirty yards will be missed though, coaches just have to adjust. Romo's health will be key in those moments..

SB 50 is ours!!!

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Cool story bro.

 

[AsthmaField]

How do you think your Eagles will do this year?

Do you know why your coach would sign two injury prone RB's like Murray and Matthews?

 

[JustDezIt]

interesting, props for the work. but hes gone so none of it matters.

 

[JDSmith]

While I like Demarco Murray, and really wanted to keep him, I just don't care anymore. He's gone, he'll either fail or succeed with another team, and although I wish him no ill will I hope they don't win a game this season. The Murray Myths and similar discussions belong on an Eagles board, because he's an Eagles player.

I'd much rather discuss McFadden, Randle, Dunbar, or Ryan Williams, since they actually play for the team I care about.

How about you do a McFadden Myths?

 

[AsthmaField]

Since 2000 DeMarco Murray led all Oklahoma RB's in All Purpose TD's, 3rd in Big 12, 4th in the NCAA.

Since 2000 he leads all Oklahoma RB's in touches (combined carries and receptions), yards from scrimmage and TDs from scrimmage.

We are talking about a major college program known for running the ball. This isn't Alaska Junior College.

How can this be possible when the perception has been he spends a great deal of his time on the sidelines and in whirlpools during college?

How can it be possible that only two other Oklahoma players have been in more college games since 2000 than DeMarco Murray's 50? Murray missed 5 games, an average of a game a season. Go back and see how many college backs can play every game of the season. See how many can do it as a primary back for almost 4 full seasons.

Most good college backs come out after their junior season. Murray couldn't because he was injured a lot through his junior year and it would have been stupid to come out then.

Had Peterson stayed for his final season, it is pretty safe to say he would own all of those records.

Unfortunately for Murray, he was hurt too often to come out after 3 seasons... but he did get some records by default because he played one more year than most.

So, the injuries that Cowboy fans are making up, actually allowed him to set those records. It's amazing that our imagination actually kept Murray in college for a fourth season.

 

[SDCowboy]

Can we move on already? Jeez...

 

[DFWJC]

Just off the top of my head and with no effort, the first 5 players I could think of that have been more productive than Murray on a per year basis...all, in fact WERE more productive so far.

Murray averages 1403 per year *rushing/receiving)

In no order:
Matt Forte,
Adrian Peterson,
Chris Johnson,
Arian Foster,
LeSean McCoy

all have been more productive on a per season basis.
And those were the first 5 I thought of...maybe someone else can add more...not sure.

And it's way harder the longer your career is to keep up high averages.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I would prefer to Smash Pumpkins.

 

[landroverking]

Please just let go. He's gone and not coming back.
Now if he leads the Sheagles to the super bowl please post about him again, in the eagles forum.

 

[Maxmadden]

Myth, money buys happiness. Dallas offered him a lot of money to wear the star and run behind one of the better offensive lines in the NFL. Philadelphia offered him more money. Truly hope he is happy, but if any of your myths turns out to be wrong, the Philadelphia fans will crucify him in a heartbeat.

 

[CF74]

I would prefer to Smash Pumpkins.

Despite all your rage you're still just a rat in a cage Sam...

 

[TwoDeep3]

First, let me explain the difference between myth and truth.

Myths almost always started from a truth that was blown to exaggeration. Throughout the ages the real story is not interesting or substantial enough to be of interest and so certain liberties are taken by the narrators. over time, these exaggerations replace the truth. The story is repeated so often that it is first accepted as the new truth. However, more time passes and the "enhancements" on the real story becomes so improbable that it becomes relegated to fiction.

We have reached this point when it comes to describing the career of DeMarco Murray thus far.

Myth #1:

"DeMarco Murray" is injury prone and has been since his college days."

Yes, Murray is "injury prone", in it's strictest definition. that is, he is prone to injury, there exists a probability that he could become injured again.

Newsflash!:

He's a running back! All running backs are prone to injury, they are constantly running full speed into a group of guys bigger then them. To us, a full game as a running back would be similar to experiencing 20 to 25 car wrecks. RB's get beat up, they get hurt, they become injured.

When you look at the top twenty active RB's in the league, there is not a single one that played in every game. Only 5 of them have missed less than 10 games. 12 of them have missed more than a seasons worth of games.

When you look at the missed games as a percentage of all possible games, DeMarco is in the middle of the top 20, missing 17.2% of his games.

By the way, Darren McFadden is the leader in games missed at 25.9%.

Ahmad Bradshaw, Arian Foster, Ryan Matthews, DeAngelo Williams, Reggie Bush and Fred Jackson have also been more "injury prone"

When you look at the top 50 backs in NFL history since the 16 game format, the average percentage of missed games is 13.3%. It may shock you to learn that the 2nd least injured top 50 RB was Eddie George....who carried the ball over 400 times in his fifth season....over 300 times in each of his 4 previous seasons and over 300 times in the 3 seasons following his 5th...but I'll get to the "workhorse season burnout" myth later.

But here is where a point needs to be made:

Only three of the top twenty active RB's have been more productive per season played than DeMarco Murray.

Translation:

Even if it is true than Murray is more injury prone than some of them, he is still more productive overall. An occasionally injured DeMarco Murray produces more than even the healthiest RB's in the league today.

When it comes to the perception that DeMarco Murray had an injury prone college career then I just have to ask how that could be possible when:

Since 2000 DeMarco Murray led all Oklahoma RB's in All Purpose TD's, 3rd in Big 12, 4th in the NCAA.

Since 2000 he leads all Oklahoma RB's in touches (combined carries and receptions), yards from scrimmage and TDs from scrimmage.

We are talking about a major college program known for running the ball. This isn't Alaska Junior College.

How can this be possible when the perception has been he spends a great deal of his time on the sidelines and in whirlpools during college?

How can it be possible that only two other Oklahoma players have been in more college games since 2000 than DeMarco Murray's 50? Murray missed 5 games, an average of a game a season. Go back and see how many college backs can play every game of the season. See how many can do it as a primary back for almost 4 full seasons.

In Murray's rookie season he ran behind an offensive line that started the season with only two players on the O-line that had previous starting experience with the Cowboys, Free and Kosier, former 4th and 7th round picks respectively.

The following year the Cowboys started all 5 O-linemen at positions they had never started as a Dallas Cowboy. It would be fair to say that Murray wasn't as much injury prone as he was exposed to danger.

With that said, DeMarco Murray ended his Cowboy career with 26 consecutive starts, the last being the divisional playoff game. During those 26 games he averaged over 100 yards per game rushing and 130 yards from scrimmage.

Next myth I expose:

"NFL RB's that carry the balls as many times as Murray did in 2014 typically burnout as a result and are never the same for the rest of their career."

I have thought long about the way this board and these fans treated Murray. The excuses they have made about him to assuage his leaving. And while I believe what you are saying, and admire your research, I think this comes down to one thing.

Fans, like the American society, since fandom tends to mirror the behaviors of the non-football society, requires someone to take the blame for results that are not what the fan expected, anticipated, hoped for. This is a blame assigning society, and someone has to pay for the Green Bay loss. Murray's fumble, caused by Peppers, means he is held accountable.

This was the very same knee-jerk when Fasano dropped a pass for a touchdown in a play-off game. The same genuflection when Crayton short-armed a pass in a play-off game.

But the dichotomy with this emotional blame game is the stature of the player in the eyes of the masses. If this were Romo who fumbled the ball, - and we have that example in a field goal situation in a play-off game -it would be glossed over and the defense would have been held suspect. So the altitude of the fans esteem over a player can absolve culpability and swing it toward someone or something else. I am not knocking Romo nor blaming the Seattle loss on the field goal. Merely offering an exemplar on how this phenomenon works. This is a demonstration of the group mind think the hopeful fan who puts all his/her eggs in one pet cat basket exhibit, diverting fault to others.

It doesn't matter the game could have been won, and should have been won by attacking Green Bay's offense and Rodgers in the first half, forcing him to stay off balance. Instead the coaches played it safe and allowed him to get a rhythm. But what stays in the minds of fans so starved for a positive end to a season considering the twenty years since that occurred, is to find a reason for their hurt feelings.

The scapegoat.

Because disappointment needs a reason, and that reason needs to be someone's fault!

I do not believe in injury prone, which indicates a serendipity involvement, or some short coming on the players part. I do not believe in this idea that after a great season expect him to become average. I also do not believe in this idea it was the line and anyone can supplant a pretty gifted running back and can find the right hole and hit it.

But what caused all the excuse making by those who were so vocal about Murray leaving because of money - which is absurd since the team could have retained him and done everything they did. Stephen Jones has scoffed at the idea the cap prevents moves, and his quote is even a sig of one of the fans here.

It comes down to blaming someone for how bad the fan feels when the season ends abruptly, with the outcome falling short of the fans hopes and dreams.

And with culpability - factual or perceived - comes punishment.

Of course the torch and pitchfork crowd will vehemently deny this. Dressing up disappointment in logical team management type of commentary about cap and the future with the unproven tends to disguise the hurt feelings of those in grief mode.

But for those who will feast on the players of their own team, a good 'ol lynching party is exactly what the doctor ordered to fill that hole left by an unfulfilled season where the foundation was built so heavily on hope exacerbated by twenty years of arid history.

 

[plasticman]

Good for you.

How many times in his career has he played a full season?

He was a product of the oline and that's it.

Actually, that is myth #4.

 

[CF74]

I have thought long about the way this board and these fans treated Murray. The excuses they have made about him to assuage his leaving. And while I believe what you are saying, and admire your research, I think this comes down to one thing.

Fans, like the American society, since fandom tends to mirror the behaviors of the non-football society, requires someone to take the blame for results that are not what the fan expected, anticipated, hoped for. This is a blame assigning society, and someone has to pay for the Green Bay loss. Murray's fumble, caused by Peppers, means he is held accountable.

This was the very same knee-jerk when Fasano dropped a pass for a touchdown in a play-off game. The same genuflection when Crayton short-armed a pass in a play-off game.

But the dichotomy with this emotional blame game is the stature of the player in the eyes of the masses. If this were Romo who fumbled the ball, - and we have that example in a field goal situation in a play-off game -it would be glossed over and the defense would have been held suspect. So the altitude of the fans esteem over a player can absolve culpability and swing it toward someone or something else. I am not knocking Romo nor blaming the Seattle loss on the field goal. Merely offering an exemplar on how this phenomenon works. This is a demonstration of the group mind think the hopeful fan who puts all his/her eggs in one pet cat basket exhibit, diverting fault to others.

It doesn't matter the game could have been won, and should have been won by attacking Green Bat's offense and Rodgers in the first half, forcing him to stay off balance. Instead the coaches played it safe and allowed him to get a rhythm. But what stays in the minds of fans so starved for a positive end to a season considering the twenty years since that occurred, is to find a reason for their hurt feelings.

The scapegoat.

Because disappointment needs a reason, and that reason needs to be someone's fault!

I do not believe in injury prone, which indicates a serendipity involvement, or some short coming on the players part. I do not believe in this idea that after a great season expect him to become average. I also do not believe in this idea it was the line and anyone can supplant a pretty gifted running back and can find the right hole and hit it.

But what caused all the excuse making by those who were so vocal about Murray leaving because of money - which is absurd since the team could have retained him and done everything they did. Stephen Jones has scoffed at the idea the cap prevents moves, and his quote is even a sig of one of the fans here.

It comes down to blaming someone for how bad the fan feels when the season ends abruptly, with the outcome falling short of the fans hopes and dreams.

And with culpability - factual or perceived - comes punishment.

Of course the torch and pitchfork crowd will vehemently deny this. Dressing up disappointment in logical team management type of commentary about cap and the future with the unproven tends to disguise the hurt feelings of those in grief mode.

But for those who will feast on the players of their own team, a good 'ol lynching party is exactly what the doctor ordered to fill that hole left by an unfulfilled season where the foundation was built so heavily on hope exacerbated by twenty years of arid history.

That was truly too deep for most...