Tevin Coleman's 40

[burmafrd]

Murray will definitely be replaced, not so sure about "easily" however. If it were that easy, the best OLs would do it every season. Looking forward to seeing the competition and eventual solution nevertheless.

remember years ago when Denver cranked out 1000 yard backs like some kind of factory? I think they had like 4 or 5 different guys get over a thousand in seven or eight years.


found this article from 2008. Kind of astonishing
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/1147/denver-running-backs-over-the-years

 

[jnday]

You know, that brings up a good question. Murray was 213 pounds at the combine. He ran a 4.41 and was known as a speed guy who could take it to the house. He had superb receiving skills and was excellent in blitz pickup too, and that's reportedly why the Cowboys loved him. I even read somewhere they thought of Murray as very similar to Felix Jones. What the experts did not describe Murray as was a strong, tough, inside runner who could push the pile. So, my question is, the Cowboys went into the season committed to running the ball, but at that time, was their idea to feature the punishing running attack we ended up seeing week in and week out or did it just turn out that way?

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/demarco-murray?id=2495207

Murray sure changed himself into a power RB, but it was at the expense of speed and the ability to break long runs. I don't remember him showing any signs of being a power RB in college. I don't remember his vision bejng this bad in college either.

 

[AsthmaField]

remember years ago when Denver cranked out 1000 yard backs like some kind of factory? I think they had like 4 or 5 different guys get over a thousand in seven or eight years.

It was their system and their OL. Good point.

Dallas will find a guy and he is going to do very well, IMO.

 

[AsthmaField]

Murray sure changed himself into a power RB, but it was at the expense of speed and the ability to break long runs. I don't remember him showing any signs of being a power RB in college. I don't remember his vision bejng this bad in college either.

His vision really was bad. I don't know how many times I've been watching a game and seen a cutback lane that many RB's will see every time, and Murray would just run straight until he got tackled.

After watching a decade or so of Emmitt exploiting every little crease... it drove me crazy.

Murray did good though but he left a whole lot of yards on the table.

 

[BAT]

remember years ago when Denver cranked out 1000 yard backs like some kind of factory? I think they had like 4 or 5 different guys get over a thousand in seven or eight years.


found this article from 2008. Kind of astonishing
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/1147/denver-running-backs-over-the-years

I agree that our scheme (which is very similar to Alex Gibbs' in Denver and Houston) is extremely RB friendly. But 1,000 yards and 1,8000 yards rushers are not the same. Davis and Clinton Portis were the most talented of the Denver backs and only Davis (2 time SB winner) outrushed Murray in all those years that Denver was churning out 1,000 yard rushers. And as talented as Portis was, he never was able to get Denver in championship contention.

Even the greatest schemes need talent.

 

[VACowboy]

Good observation. This was mentioned earlier on in this thread but it didn't really get it's due IMO. I think the physical running style came into focus when we got the physical personnel along the OL to make it work. I think that Murray has always been physical once he gets into the secondary but it's how he ran against the front seven. Was he more physical this year or did he just have more opportunities to run hard into the secondary?

He ran the ball a high percentage of the time on first down and into bunches of stacked boxes when everybody and their brother knew he was coming. The OL leaned on the front seven and Murray pounded them for three quarters, so by the time the fourth quarter rolled around Murray was trucking DBs who were really getting tired of seeing him coming. I'd have to say Murray earned a lot of that respect himself. The real question may be, how much did the contract year figure into his effort?

 

[Beast_from_East]

After his 40 time at the pro day, no way in hell is Coleman making it to pick 60.

If this is our guy, we either have to trade back with our first or just take Coleman at 27.............he is not going to be there at 60

 

[Spectre]

One can watch film and easily see that Gordon and Coleman should not be mentioned in the same sentence. Regardless of o-line- the former is hands down a better runningback. Taking Coleman at 27 is ludicrous. Trading up in the 2nd is ridiculous. This guy seems kinda one-dimensional, and stiff, with a fast 40 time... 3rd round talent, using the word 'talent' lightly.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I dont know about the Coleman and Bell comparison. Bell is like 30 lbs heavier and .2 slower in the 40.

Coleman actually kind of reminds me of a slower michael bennett (badgers rb that had one good season with minnesota). But bennett had elite speed. Coleman is a gear below that.

I was speaking in terms of how he will lower his head make contact and bounce and not how they look standing. As for their relative 40 times, considering his teammate ran a 4.2 on that track I am unsure whether to add .1 or .2 to his time. It's a goofy fast track and he looks 4.5ish to my eye.

 

[burmafrd]

One can watch film and easily see that Gordon and Coleman should not be mentioned in the same sentence. Regardless of o-line- the former is hands down a better runningback. Taking Coleman at 27 is ludicrous. Trading up in the 2nd is ridiculous. This guy seems kinda one-dimensional, and stiff, with a fast 40 time... 3rd round talent, using the word 'talent' lightly.

agreed. Coleman is much better at getting yards on a much lesser team. Therefore Gordon should not be mentioned with Coleman as he clearly needs a lot more to get yards then coleman does.

 

[Spectre]

agreed. Coleman is much better at getting yards on a much lesser team. Therefore Gordon should not be mentioned with Coleman as he clearly needs a lot more to get yards then coleman does.

Tevin Coleman, above all RBs in this draft, requires open lanes (ie: a good o-line) for his style to be successful. For that reason, he could have some success and be a decent fit in Dallas... but so could you, for that matter.
I'd rather have a player who doesn't need a fantastic o-line to make gains, and give him one.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Tevin Coleman, above all RBs in this draft, requires open lanes (ie: a good o-line) for his style to be successful. For that reason, he could have some success and be a decent fit in Dallas... but so could you, for that matter.
I'd rather have a player who doesn't need a fantastic o-line to make gains, and give him one.

I think Coleman had a MUCH lesser Oline quality and play than Gordon and done better against many of the same teams that Gordon Faced.

So I think you are wrong in that aspect and will add that he did not have much QB or Passing game to help him.

I will also say that I think you are wrong that Burm could have success behind the Dallas line....he would be too busy yelling and arguing with people.

But...That is just my opinion.

 

[Rogerthat12]

After his 40 time at the pro day, no way in hell is Coleman making it to pick 60.

If this is our guy, we either have to trade back with our first or just take Coleman at 27.............he is not going to be there at 60

I think if a team wants Coleman, it will have to be at the top half of the second round.

Unlike a few on here, I do not see Coleman as a top 20 prospect but I do think Coleman has raised his stock with a fine pro day and will go earlier within the framework of his projection.

It is too rich to pick him at #27 if he is your target, you could trade back in the early second, add a pick and still get your RB which is a great value.

I personally do not see him being around at #60 even though he is projected as a 2-3 round prospect, I think he has raised his draft stock.

So if you want Coleman, do not reach at #27 but also do not wait too long #60, both moves are equally problematic.

 

[burmafrd]

I think Coleman had a MUCH lesser Oline quality and play than Gordon and done better against many of the same teams that Gordon Faced.

So I think you are wrong in that aspect and will add that he did not have much QB or Passing game to help him.

I will also say that I think you are wrong that Burm could have success behind the Dallas line....he would be too busy yelling and arguing with people.

But...That is just my opinion.

hey I can yell and run at the same time!

 

[burmafrd]

Tevin Coleman, above all RBs in this draft, requires open lanes (ie: a good o-line) for his style to be successful. For that reason, he could have some success and be a decent fit in Dallas... but so could you, for that matter.
I'd rather have a player who doesn't need a fantastic o-line to make gains, and give him one.

you really are out to lunch= which guy Gordon or Coleman got 2000 yards with a mediocre at best team and with a broken foot and with virtually no QB. And by the way a poorer O line.

 

[theogt]

I think Coleman had a MUCH lesser Oline quality and play than Gordon and done better against many of the same teams that Gordon Faced.

So I think you are wrong in that aspect and will add that he did not have much QB or Passing game to help him.

I will also say that I think you are wrong that Burm could have success behind the Dallas line....he would be too busy yelling and arguing with people.

But...That is just my opinion.

While their numbers among common opponents are virtually the same, so much of Coleman's yards came on long runs. It's all or nothing with him. For example, among common opponents in 2014, Coleman ran the ball 149 times but nearly half of his yardage came on just 9 runs. In other words, nearly 50% of his yardage came from about 6% of his carries. I don't know if that can translate to the NFL. He can't rely on getting multiple 50 yard runs a game to keep his average up against NFL teams. Gordon, however, is a much more consistent runner, but isn't the home run threat. Maybe I'm too conservative, and maybe Coleman would have had more consistent production with Gordon's supporting cast, but based on their common opponent stats, Gordon's style of runner just feels better to me.

 

[Oh_Canada]

One can watch film and easily see that Gordon and Coleman should not be mentioned in the same sentence. Regardless of o-line- the former is hands down a better runningback. Taking Coleman at 27 is ludicrous. Trading up in the 2nd is ridiculous. This guy seems kinda one-dimensional, and stiff, with a fast 40 time... 3rd round talent, using the word 'talent' lightly.

How many runs did Gordon make where not a finger was laid on him until the second level?
Personally I don't think either should be picked #27 but Gordon isn't that much better than Coleman.

 

[Pessimist_cowboy]

Coleman is better than Gordon .

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

While their numbers among common opponents are virtually the same, so much of Coleman's yards came on long runs. It's all or nothing with him. For example, among common opponents in 2014, Coleman ran the ball 149 times but nearly half of his yardage came on just 9 runs. In other words, nearly 50% of his yardage came from about 6% of his carries. I don't know if that can translate to the NFL. He can't rely on getting multiple 50 yard runs a game to keep his average up against NFL teams. Gordon, however, is a much more consistent runner, but isn't the home run threat. Maybe I'm too conservative, and maybe Coleman would have had more consistent production with Gordon's supporting cast, but based on their common opponent stats, Gordon's style of runner just feels better to me.

I think he can be MUCH better with a good Oline, Good QB and a good passing game.

However at this point it is all opinions and speculations.

 

[Spectre]

Coleman is a one-trick horse... run straight forward, real fast.
All these folks here talking about how poor Coleman's o-line was... watch a Coleman highlight reel. Every. Single. Run is him running straight through a huge gap. Going untouched, basically straight ahead to the endzone. His o-line was fine. Perhaps excellent. On the very few occasions I've seen him have to actually make a move to get open, it was almost laughable how awkward he looked.