The elephant in the room

[JohnsKey19]

Joseph Randle.

Off-field issues aside, what do we really have in Randle? He was impressive as a backup. Talented runner, versatile and able to contribute on all 3 downs. It's interesting to see how he has nearly been removed from all fans' projections next season, but ultimately what do the Cowboys have in mind? That answer will determine what happens in the draft. Obviously no one should expect 1200+ yards from Randle or probably close to that, but does this staff think he can give them a productive 120-150 carries over a full season?

 

[Stash]

I'm in the bellcow running back section. I think a running game functions better when you have 'the man' and a backup group. I'm not and gave never been a fan of running back by committee. And I believe this team's most successful history bears this out.

 

[Alexander]

I'm in the bellcow running back section. I think a running game functions better when you have 'the man' and a backup group. I'm not and gave never been a fan of running back by committee. And I believe this team's most successful history bears this out.

You can start out with a committee approach, but eventually you need to have a back that carries the majority of the time. It is how you develop rhythm and tempo. When a team knows what and who is coming and they still cannot stop them, it makes a difference. I have yet to see a team with a "dominant" running game that got there with the "thunder/lightning" approach. That rhythm is so important. The back gets worked into the game, the line also prospers because they know his tendencies with vision as well.

 

[Stash]

You can start out with a committee approach, but eventually you need to have a back that carries the majority of the time. It is how you develop rhythm and tempo. When a team knows what and who is coming and they still cannot stop them, it makes a difference. I have yet to see a team with a "dominant" running game that got there with the "thunder/lightning" approach. That rhythm is so important. The back gets worked into the game, the line also prospers because they know his tendencies with vision as well.

Exactly. I think it's huge for a running back to get into a groove.

 

[iceberg]

I'm in the bellcow running back section. I think a running game functions better when you have 'the man' and a backup group. I'm not and gave never been a fan of running back by committee. And I believe this team's most successful history bears this out.

New england has no feature back, seatyle does. I think eexecution n design of plan with what you have is more important than having a traditional backfield.

 

[Proximo]

I'm in the bellcow running back section. I think a running game functions better when you have 'the man' and a backup group. I'm not and gave never been a fan of running back by committee. And I believe this team's most successful history bears this out.

I agree.

I'm just not sure we're going to have that bellcow type RB on the roster this year.

I like how Randle progressed from his rookie year to last year, but I don't think he's that 300+ carry guy. Dunbar is clearly a change of pace guy. And who knows what Darren is going to bring to the table.

And I can't imagine we'll draft a guy that can carry the load his rookie year.

We might be forced into a RB by committee situation in 2015.

I'll be very curios to see what Garrett, Linehan and co come up with.

 

[Craig]

Im not too worried about having one back. If your qb is a game manager, you need that. Romo is plenty good to utilize a committee.

Maybe mcfadden gets inspired and plays well and they can use him as the horse for a few games before he breaks down. Hes certainly a guy capable of being featured if hes ever healthy.

 

[LittleD]

We may have lucked out with the McFadden pickup because even though he has been hurt much
of his career, he was always a good pickup blocker and I think behind this OL, he may flourish
like he never did in Oakland where good players go to die. I do think Dallas will draft a RB this year
so we will have competition for who gets carries each week. Stay tuned!

 

[Alexander]

New england has no feature back, seatyle does. I think eexecution n design of plan with what you have is more important than having a traditional backfield.

New England changes their attack based on Belichick's week to week approach. Nobody else is anywhere as successful with that approach. They are unique in how they can switch their running game on and off and even interchange backs. Good luck trying to replicate that.

 

[Alexander]

Im not too worried about having one back. If your qb is a game manager, you need that. Romo is plenty good to utilize a committee.

Romo had a banner year because the one back dominant running attack took the pressure off of him. I do not understand how people just do not understand how that running game, with its tempo, controlled football games and made everything so much easier. It even helped shield a very mediocre defense.

As dominant is this OL is, I do not think they are prepared to go back to a pass happy attack.

 

[Stash]

New england has no feature back, seatyle does. I think eexecution n design of plan with what you have is more important than having a traditional backfield.

There's certainly something to be said for execution. But, if Seattle gave that ball to their bellcow, are we having this conversation?

 

[Arkyvarminter]

Randall is definitely not an every down back and you pointed that out. He is good in certain situations and does well when sprinkled in there. I don't have a lot of faith in the committee approach either. We need a young, hungry, big rookie to shoulder the load. I just hope it doesn't take him a year to get into a groove because we'll need him THIS year.....

 

[Stash]

I agree.

I'm just not sure we're going to have that bellcow type RB on the roster this year.

I like how Randle progressed from his rookie year to last year, but I don't think he's that 300+ carry guy. Dunbar is clearly a change of pace guy. And who knows what Darren is going to bring to the table.

And I can't imagine we'll draft a guy that can carry the load his rookie year.

We might be forced into a RB by committee situation in 2015.

I'll be very curios to see what Garrett, Linehan and co come up with.

I think Gurley can be that guy if he's still there, and McFadden might buy the time to ease him into the role off of ACL surgery. But if we don't do anything at DE to improve this woeful pass rush, we may be forced to draft one in Rd 1 and pass on what could be a truly special running back.

 

[Stash]

Romo had a banner year because the one back dominant running attack took the pressure off of him. I do not understand how people just do not understand how that running game, with its tempo, controlled football games and made everything so much easier. It even helped shield a very mediocre defense.

As dominant is this OL is, I do not think they are prepared to go back to a pass happy attack.

Pass happy has been proven to be a mistake. Everybody should be able to see that. Even in Green Bay, it reared its ugly head when Romo called that bone-headed audible just before halftime. And again, it cost us dearly.

And it's still here to a degree. If this team faces anything over 3rd and 1, they're still throwing the ball.

 

[ThreeandOut]

I think Gurley can be that guy if he's still there, and McFadden might buy the time to ease him into the role off of ACL surgery. But if we don't do anything at DE to improve this woeful pass rush, we may be forced to draft one in Rd 1 and pass on what could be a truly special running back.

I think they'll pick the best available player. They wouldn't pass on the RB with a first round grade over a DE with a second round grade.

 

[VACowboy]

You can start out with a committee approach, but eventually you need to have a back that carries the majority of the time. It is how you develop rhythm and tempo. When a team knows what and who is coming and they still cannot stop them, it makes a difference. I have yet to see a team with a "dominant" running game that got there with the "thunder/lightning" approach. That rhythm is so important. The back gets worked into the game, the line also prospers because they know his tendencies with vision as well.

I'm in the bell cow camp myself, but I believe less in the whole "rhythm" thing than a lot of people do. I think a running game is better with one guy carrying the ball because 1) the line knows how he runs and how to block for him, and 2) if one guy is carrying the ball all the time, he's probably pretty good.

 

[CF74]

He's a 10-15 rep change of pace back that could probably handle 20 occasional reps every other 3-4 games.. In other words he's your #2 back.

 

[Fredd]

As far as what they can contribute to the team (IMO):

Randall, good
Dunbar, interesting
McFadden, unknown
all others, pipe dream

I like to have a guy that is going to trot out there on first down and get you 4 or 5 consistently, I don't see that just yet, although McFadden has the best chance on the current roster

 

[Craig]

There's certainly something to be said for execution. But, if Seattle gave that ball to their bellcow, are we having this conversation?

New england would have still been right there for the super bowl...just like they were against the giants. Of course...then theres the giants 2 times. And the packers. And the saints. And the colts. Oh and the ground and pound steelers ran the rbbc in their super bowl.

 

[VACowboy]

I'm in the bell cow camp myself, but I believe less in the whole "rhythm" thing than a lot of people do. I think a running game is better with one guy carrying the ball because 1) the line knows how he runs and how to block for him, and 2) if one guy is carrying the ball all the time, he's probably pretty good.

I need to clarify...

I think a RB needs a certain number of carries to be his best. If that's rhythm, than disregard my last post.

I think the committee approach can work if a coach rides the hot hand.