The defense will be better with Zeke

[KJJ]

If you consider that 'kicking butt,' then I question your grasp on both kicks and butts. To the rest of us, it's what we call 'flailing.'

In any event, enough again. Cheers.

You claimed the Cowboys can compete with a mid round back but they had a couple of mid round backs in Turbin and Randle last season who did very little and were both released. We saw an example last year of what you get with most mid round backs and you wanted to stick with that type of back again in 2016? The only way you're going to get great production from a mid round back is if you get lucky and they turn into a great back. If they play like a mid round back regardless how good your OL is it's not going to take pressure off Romo.

 

[BAT]

Yeah, call me old school but I prefer to improve the defense by actually improving the defense. Not spending resource after resource figuring out ways just to keep them off the field. At some point they have to play.

Also, unless Zeke can somehow produce 20 turnovers (the difference between 2014 and 2015) he isn't that big of a help.

I am a big advocate of the offense holding the ball and keeping our defense fresh. But you are absolutely correct, at some point, the D is going to have to play, fresh or not. And Zeke is no help when the D is on the field.

Need better talent on D. Period.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I never argued about the time that they was on the field. My statement was about what they was doing when they was on the field. They was not doing the same thing. That is the fact that I was presenting. Murray produced scores, DMac, not so much. I hope you are not leaning towards thinking that DMac is just as productive as Murray. Even today, Dmmitt could have scored more than three TDs behind this line.

So what you're saying is it was Murray producing scores and Xmas not producing.

I guess Murray having Romo and Dez and Dmac having Kellen and Butler had nothing to do with it? The more you know.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

You claimed the Cowboys can compete with a mid round back but they had a couple of mid round backs in Turbin and Randle last season who did very little and were both released. We saw an example last year of what you get with most mid round backs and you wanted to stick with that type of back again in 2016? The only way you're going to get great production from a mid round back is if you get lucky and they turn into a great back. If they play like a mid round back regardless how good your OL is it's not going to take pressure off Romo.

People ignoring what all changed between 2014 and 2015 to try and prove the difference was the the rb available is hilarious.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Was DMac injured as well? I know the oline was healthy. Does Dez do that much fun blocking where that him not blocking for DMac hurt his TD total? The fact is that the RBs on last year's roster couldn't start for very many teams in the league. DMac had plenty of opportunities running behind the best line in football and only scored three TDs. That is not bad , that is pitiful. I expect more production from the position. There was not a RB on the roster that defense's feared or game planned for. They was not playmakers or game changers. DMac in particular proved that stats doesn't translate into impact.

Did you just ask if not having a healthy Dez on the field impacted Dean's productivity?

Was that a serious question?

 

[Toruk_Makto]

They will be the first to forget about their opposition to the pick after Zeke starts producing big numbers and scoring TDs. Zeke be responsible for more points this season than Ramsey will his entire career. Points=impact. I had to live with the stinking Mompick for the last several years. Another top ten pick wasted on s DB would have probably made me a casual fan that only watched s game or two each year. I wouldn't have got upset , I expected the Ramsey pick. I am encourage that Jerry is learning from past mistakes .

Can you find a single person who didn't want to draft Zeke that also says he won't produce in this offense?

The actual point people are making is that any competent back will produce in this offense. And it is for that reason buying Zeke at 4 was wasteful.

So of course Zeke who is more than competent will do well. But guess what? That isn't the point.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Can you find a single person who didn't want to draft Zeke that also says he won't produce in this offense?

The actual point people are making is that any competent back will produce in this offense. And it is for that reason buying Zeke at 4 was wasteful.

So of course Zeke who is more than competent will do well. But guess what? That isn't the point.

Define...."Produce", is your definition guided by pure numbers and nothing else?

 

[jnday]

So what you're saying is it was Murray producing scores and Xmas not producing.

I guess Murray having Romo and Dez and Dmac having Kellen and Butler had nothing to do with it? The more you know.

Yeah, you went there. Laying all BS aside, I had some respect for your football knowledge until this post.

 

[jnday]

Can you find a single person who didn't want to draft Zeke that also says he won't produce in this offense?

The actual point people are making is that any competent back will produce in this offense. And it is for that reason buying Zeke at 4 was wasteful.

So of course Zeke who is more than competent will do well. But guess what? That isn't the point.

There is a difference between stats and impact. My old cripple *** could get yardage behind this line , but I would have no impact in the offense.

 

[Scandri100]

Not really sure about Elliott...Nothing stands out when watching his highlights compared to a guy like Gurley.

 

[KJJ]

People ignoring what all changed between 2014 and 2015 to try and prove the difference was the the rb available is hilarious.

The Cowboys ignored it and didn't use the injuries to Romo and Dez as an excuse for why the running game wasn't more efficient which is why they drafted Zeke. They saw like everyone else that the running game averaged under 4.0 a carry the first 2 weeks WITH Romo. There's no excuse for your lead back who had a career high in carries and who was playing behind the best OL in the entire league to only score 3 rushing TD's. There's no excuse for a team that has the best OL in the game to be worst team in the league on 3rd and one.

If you told the McFadden supporters that he would only score 3 total TD's with a combined 279 touches rushing and receiving they wouldn't have believed it. Despite Murray having 42 less touches in Philly in 2015 he scored more than twice as many TD's as McFadden and had a longer run from scrimmage that he scored on. According to the McFadden supporters he was suppose to give us longer runs than Murray because most were stuck in the past with him from 8 years ago when he had blazing speed.

Our OL was intact all season having 3 pro bowlers and what McFadden produced last season any average back could have produced behind our OL. Adrian Peterson put up almost 2100 yards a few years ago despite a bad QB situation and no Dez Bryant at WR. There's been teams in the past that didn't have as good an OL as the Cowboys had in 2015 and didn't have as good a QB as Tony Romo or a WR as good as Dez Bryant but they still had a great rushing game due to having a great back because the back matters.

 

[AdamJT13]

I disagree. Adam has said time after time that the passing game is the only thing that matters and that the running game has no effect on winning.

What I have stated repeatedly is that the success of the running game, generally speaking, has very little effect on whether you win or lose. Whatever effects the running game has on the passing game can be had no matter how well or how poorly you run the ball. All of that is borne out by the facts.

Last year in the NFL, the team that passed the ball better won 78.9 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they ran the ball better than their opponent (79.9 percent wins) or ran the ball worse than their opponent (77.9 percent wins).

Teams that did NOT pass better than their opponent won 21.1 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they ran the ball better than their opponent (22.1 percent wins) or ran the ball worse than their opponent (20.1 percent wins).

Overall, teams than ran better than their opponent won 52.3 percent of the time. Teams that ran worse than their opponent won 47.7 percent of the time.

Obviously, running better than your opponent has very little effect on whether you win or lose. To say otherwise is ludicrous.

And all of these numbers have been consistent throughout the league, every season and for every team, for the past several decades.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What I have stated repeatedly is that the success of the running game, generally speaking, has very little effect on whether you win or lose. Whatever effects the running game has on the passing game can be had no matter how well or how poorly you run the ball. All of that is borne out by the facts.

Last year in the NFL, the team that passed the ball better won 78.9 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they ran the ball better than their opponent (79.9 percent wins) or ran the ball worse than their opponent (77.9 percent wins).

Teams that did NOT pass better than their opponent won 21.1 percent of the time, and it made almost no difference whether they ran the ball better than their opponent (22.1 percent wins) or ran the ball worse than their opponent (20.1 percent wins).

Overall, teams than ran better than their opponent won 52.3 percent of the time. Teams that ran worse than their opponent won 47.7 percent of the time.

Obviously, running better than your opponent has very little effect on whether you win or lose. To say otherwise is ludicrous.

And all of these numbers have been consistent throughout the league, every season and for every team, for the past several decades.

You have to be tired of repeating that at this point.

 

[AdamJT13]

I just can't get past this statement. By saying how WELL you keep equating that with yards gained.

I have never used total yards gained as the determining measurement for how well a team runs the ball in a game. How much a team runs the ball and how many total yards it gains is often a product of the game situation -- the team with the lead usually runs the ball late in the game, while the team that is behind usually has to pass to catch up -- rather than a product of how well either team runs it. I've always referred to overall YPC or any other per-play measurement.

One team can have 180 yards rushing for the game but be 0/6 on 3rd down conversions running the ball.
Another team can have 90 yards rushing for the game but be 5/6 on converting 3rd downs when running the ball.

Again, I don't care which team has the most yards. And I have said many times that converting on short-yardage situations is when rushing success helps.

 

[AdamJT13]

Yeah I think Adam is under the assumption that Rushing Totals equate to How Good or Effective you are at running the ball. He seems to use it as the basis of his analysis a lot

"A lot" ... as in never.

 

[rpntex]

But you are missing this quote directly from Adam.

"How well you run it when you choose to run has almost no impact on whether you win or lose, nor does how well you stop the run when the opponent runs."

No, I understand that, and he is right from a global viewpoint. When you outrush the opponent, it's still a 50-50 "coin flip". So, generally speaking, it has very little effect.

Now specifically in Dallas' case, it has a tremendous effect. Dallas' running game us what makes the passing game go.

We're still talking about how well you run it as opposed to how well your opponent runs, and not how well you run as opposed to how well you pass. It's a different discussion.

 

[rpntex]

You can't stand that the Cowboys and the NFL back my position because I am right. Dude, think about it you've been brainwashed by some data that a FAN posted on a message board. The gullibility of some of you is hilarious. Nothing pains me because we picked the player I was hoping for you it's you and a few others who are in pain thinking taking an RB with the 4th overall pick was a bad move.

Where do you get that BS? I am absolutely thrilled that Dallas drafted EE. He's going to improve the offense in three ways. Of course by rushing the ball. Second, by extending drives and keeping the defense off the field. Third, by protecting Romo and making the passing game more effective. He's the only player in the draft that could have such a large impact on the entire team.

I'd like you to point out one post - ONE - where I have ever said I was against talking him. Yes, I was hesitant about taking a RB at #4, but I always qualified that by saying that Zeke is not "any old RB". Show me one post where I've said anything about being upset that we chose him at #4, and I'll post a personal apology to you on the front page. When you don't find such a post, you post an apology. You willing to take that bet?

You're pathetic...go making up stuff to draw attention off the truth. Numbers don't lie, but you can't stand having someone else be right - even when you're also right. Like I said...pathetic.

 

[AdamJT13]

Now specifically in Dallas' case, it has a tremendous effect. Dallas' running game us what makes the passing game go.

So explain why some of Murray's best games in 2014 were some of Romo's worst games, and vice-versa.

Wouldn't a great running game make our passing game better, if "the running game is what makes the passing game go"?

And wouldn't NOT being able to run the ball effectively make our passing game struggle, if "the running game is what makes the passing game go"?

 

[rpntex]

So explain why some of Murray's best games in 2014 were some of Romo's worst games, and vice-versa.

Wouldn't a great running game make our passing game better, if "the running game is what makes the passing game go"?

And wouldn't NOT being able to run the ball effectively make our passing game struggle, if "the running game is what makes the passing game go"?

there are exceptions, of course. And sometimes, it's just the opposite. The passing game opens up the run game. 2015 is a great example of what happens when the passing game gets shut down. It's much easier to defend the run. I don't get that hung up on how well we run as opposed to how well we pass. Instead, I think how we pass as opposed to the opposition is critical.

 

[KJJ]

Where do you get that BS? I am absolutely thrilled that Dallas drafted EE. He's going to improve the offense in three ways.

I haven't been following your posts I just assumed you weren't happy with the pick because you've been attacking me and appeared to be on the same page with Adam. Once you started reciting some of the things he's posted I stopped reading it's a waste of time. Most who see things the way he does on this topic weren't happy with the pick.