The Great Running Back Debate

[Dave_in-NC]

You'll take your RB debate and you'll like it. We'll be bringing up the topic of Adrian Peterson in just a few posts if you keep up that attitude, mister.

Would rather have my nuts covered in red ants.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Like many of you, I am concerned about the Cowboy’s perceived Running Back by committee approach in 2015. After last season, I honestly thought anybody who actually sat down and watched every game understood that much of what was accomplished last year hinged on the running game – every aspect of the Cowboys football team was made better by how well the running game worked.

Some believe Murray benefitted more from the OL. Despite setting the new team record for rushing yards in a season, I do not recall a single game that I walked away from believing that Murray squeezed every last yard he could out of every run. Given that line of thinking, it wasn not too far-fetched to believe that were the Cowboys able to find a guy with a little better vision and better overall speed, behind that offensive line the Cowboys would be unstoppable.

Still others believe that it was the OL that benefitted from the simultaneous threat of the pass vs. the run. It was a true pick your poison situation for the opposing defense last year, meaning much of their game-planning was dependent on reading and reacting post-snap; ill-conceived pre-snap reads against the Cowboys is what led to a good portion of their pay-dirt last season. Therefore, because defenses were continuously off-balance, the offensive line enjoyed a split-second of indecision and this clearly made them look like world-beaters in many situations.

Don’t get me wrong; I’m not discounting the efforts of any one entity - be it the OL or Demarco Murray. I’m merely pointing out that both benefitted from each other – both made each other look better than what they deserved to look like…if that makes sense.

So with all of that having been said, the majority of the so-called experts (including my admittedly not-so-expert-opinion) fully expected the Cowboys to find a guy who could at the very least replace a little of Demarco’s production…and most also agreed that despite having signed McFadden, the search would continue in the draft.

Flash forward to the draft. With the first pick at 27 the Cowboys drafted Byron Jones. Some said this was a reach, some said this was a steal given where in the first round he was taken. Regardless of what you believe, I think most will agree that any RB left at that point, with Gordon and Gurley already gone, would have definitely been a reach.

So at this point, while I was disappointed the “great running back situation” had not been addressed in day 1, I at least understood the move. The Cowboys did address a glaring need and many would agree he was the Best Player Available, so I was still content.

Day 2 of the draft saw a player considered the best pass rusher available in the draft fall to the Cowboys at the 60th pick overall. At one time considered a top 15 talent, knuckleheadedness led to his considerable drop. Despite that, most agree the 60th overall pick was worth the gamble for a team desperate for a pass-rush last season. I’m reluctant to argue against that. Yes, that still meant the running back situation had not been addressed, but once again this was considered a need, especially with the uncertainty of Hardy's suspension situation, so while still uncomfortable with the Cowboys current stable of backs , I understood the move.

Day 3 is where the wheels completely fell off. Every RB worthy of the Cowboys consideration was taken before the Cowboys had an opportunity at 91. Don’t get me wrong, I get that Langford and Ajayi were still available, but to that I would argue that neither of those players or other miscellaneous drafted late RB would be an actual improvement over what the Cowboys already have. Langford is Dunbar/McFadden 2.0. Ajayi remind’s me a lot of JoRan.

Many are still clamoring for a move involving AP which I am resolutely against. He is 30, a year removed from football, would demand a contract of, at least, 3 years 8 mil at minimum, would demand extremely valuable draft picks/players being sent to the Vikings, and would be running on two surgically repaired knees. All the signs and symptoms of disaster waiting to happen are there. Why even Dez is blind to this is beyond me.

Don’t get me wrong, AP may have a good year or two in him…if any Running Back does at 30, he would. But still, the risk versus reward doesn’t add up to good business sense, in my opinion.

In the wake of all this, the Cowboys were able to hush up much of the white-noise in regards to Running Back with the stunning and sudden acquisition of La’el Collins. Clearly, his addition help’s the assertion that any running back should be able to find success behind the offensive line…but still. For me, I still have reservations, misgivings and am back to that old territory that all Cowboys fans should be familiar with post-draft – cautiously optimistic.

Granted, I would give this offseason as a whole an A -. They seemingly improved at various levels on Defense, namely the defensive line. They were able to miraculously add what many would consider three 1st round caliber talents in the draft. With the return of Sean Lee, they are adding what many would consider a first round pick, should you be kind enough to forget about the injury issues. They exercised a great deal of patience throughout Free Agency and ignored the itch to make sweeping massive changes/additions to the team that will cost the Cowboys in the long-run for the exception of the Romo restructure.

All in all, this Cowboys team look’s the best it has since 1995. The big question is will the Cowboys regret not making more of a concerted effort to replace Demarco Murray?

Cowboys arrogance. yeah, Demarco would half cost us but so do Romo et al. You ascept quality tou pay for quality -- at each vital position.
You guys are like Ceaser playing the lyre while Rome burns.
Let us admit letting Demarco go was colossal. McFadden is a mere player; his claim to fame is being let go by the Raiders. Randle. Dont make me like the rakish, heroic mans I am.

Things seem to be in place for a super bowl run. Escept for one and we better git a real running back soon or Romo will half to pass all day and Dez will be missing even more passes than usual.
Come to your senses men.

 

[Champsheart]

My concern has more to do with situational football...specifically short yardage situations. First question is, who is the short yardage back? At this point, the only guy's I think capable of getting a few yards when all you need is a few yards are the 2 UDFA's they picked up, Synjin Days being one of them. The problem is, if the Cowboys only use Synjin Days (just for instance, I'm not saying he is making the team) in short yardage situations then by the end of the season the opposition will know what is about to happen when he is put in the lineup. That same issues applies to alot of different scenarios and could create an issue as the season progresses.

Marcus Allen is one of the best short yardage backs in history and the dude was lean. You don't have to be thick to be a short yardage back. I think both will take on this role. But in the end short yardage is about lining up and being more man than the other guys when they know exactly what is coming. It is fine to be predictable here, line up and say try to stop us. In short yardage situation last year everyone knew what was coming and could not stop it. In the Superbowl everyone knew what was coming, although it didn't. lol.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Marcus Allen is one of the best short yardage backs in history and the dude was lean. You don't have to be thick to be a short yardage back. I think both will take on this role. But in the end short yardage is about lining up and being more man than the other guys when they know exactly what is coming. It is fine to be predictable here, line up and say try to stop us. In short yardage situation last year everyone knew what was coming and could not stop it. In the Superbowl everyone knew what was coming, although it didn't. lol.

Tony D was a good short yardage back also. It's not always about ramming your way through... Many times it's as easy to simply find that small crease created by the offensive line and slide through.

 

[Zekeats]

I believe they drafted Randle in the first place with the objective of him replacing Murray. McFadden's is here as an insurance policy who can pass protect.

They drafted him to backup Murray.

 

[Champsheart]

Tony D was a good short yardage back also. It's not always about ramming your way through... Many times it's as easy to simply find that small crease created by the offensive line and slide through.

Yes sir, may very good short yardage backs that are not bowling balls.

 

[Zekeats]

AP......solved, debate over

 

[Idgit]

They drafted him to backup Murray.

Yep. And to replace him this season. Remember what people thought of Murray at the time Randle was drafted. Murray was often-injured. We'd just whiffed on Felix Jones, and Jerry's billionaire buddy was a big booster at OK State. The idea was to bring in Randle, bulk him up, and have him split time with Murray and eventually to replace him if he hit.

 

[Zekeats]

Yep. And to replace him this season. Remember what people thought of Murray at the time Randle was drafted. Murray was often-injured. We'd just whiffed on Felix Jones, and Jerry's billionaire buddy was a big booster at OK State. The idea was to bring in Randle, bulk him up, and have him split time with Murray and eventually to replace him if he hit.

They would not have signed McFading if they were so confident about Randle.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yep. And to replace him this season. Remember what people thought of Murray at the time Randle was drafted. Murray was often-injured. We'd just whiffed on Felix Jones, and Jerry's billionaire buddy was a big booster at OK State. The idea was to bring in Randle, bulk him up, and have him split time with Murray and eventually to replace him if he hit.

If Randle can improve this season similarly to what he did last year then watch out. His work in the passing game as both receiver and blocker improved leaps and bounds but morese on his burst and vision to the line as well as his moves all over the field.

He goes 6' but only 205ish. If he can put on 10 to 15 pounds of good weight and only maintain the above then watch out. His ceiling is pretty high still.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They would not have signed McFading if they were so confident about Randle.

Prove that is the case.

 

[Zekeats]

Prove that is the case.

The signing was proof.

 

[JoeKing]

Murray broke a lot of OU rushing records and scored the most TDs in their history. I don't think Randle had more college success than Murray did.

McFadden did. He will be the starting RB come September so all you Idgits out there that haven't figured this out yet, there you go. You're welcome.

I know some of you love to argue but don't waste your time, my reply to anyone that thinks it will be anyone other than DMC is just wait and see. I've already heard all the so called logical reasons why it won't be DMC but I don't care. McFadden will be a new man and run for more yards than any man his age has ever ran before... by far.

 

[Zekeats]

Now you are changing the subject. You said that they wouldn't have signed DMC if they had confidence in Randle. Now you are saying that they would not have signed DMC had Murray been retained.

Keep up with your own BS or quit spouting it.

No stinky pinky, wether it's confidence or the ability to start or not having Randle or not having Murray it is pretty safe to say they don't envision Randle as the starter now and didn't envision him as the heir apparent to Murray. He was drafted strictly as a backup.......That's why even Stephen Jones keeps talking up Ryan Williams. Yes, Ryan Williams and his less than 100 yards total in 4 seasons. Anyways keep going with your meaningless argument, it's fun........winning.

 

[Idgit]

They would not have signed McFading if they were so confident about Randle.

They still needed a back to share the load. You can't handicap Randle with Dunbar, and and neither Dunbar nor Williams can be counted on to pass protect. McFadden's hear tor his third down abilities. Whatever he might give us in terms of explosive plays with the ball in his hands is a plus. People just struggle with it because they've heard his name more than they've heard Randle's, so they think it has to be the other way around.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No stinky pinky, wether it's confidence or the ability to start or not having Randle or not having Murray it is pretty safe to say they don't envision Randle as the starter now and didn't envision him as the heir apparent to Murray. He was drafted strictly as a backup.......That's why even Stephen Jones keeps talking up Ryan Williams. Yes, Ryan Williams and his less than 100 yards total in 4 seasons. Anyways keep going with your meaningless argument, it's fun........winning.

So you have no proof of your claim and instead double down with repeating the same drivel and assuming your premise. Got it.

 

[Zekeats]

They still needed a back to share the load. You can't handicap Randle with Dunbar, and and neither Dunbar nor Williams can be counted on to pass protect. McFadden's hear tor his third down abilities. Whatever he might give us in terms of explosive plays with the ball in his hands is a plus. People just struggle with it because they've heard his name more than they've heard Randle's, so they think it has to be the other way around.

Which once again proves that he was drafted as a backup who would always be limited to touches, which means he was not drafted to supplant Murray.

 

[Zekeats]

So you have no proof of your claim and instead double down with repeating the same drivel and assuming your premise. Got it.

That's something a coward says when he's losing the argument, especially since nobody here has proof of anything or else it wouldn't be under discussion. Repeating the same things is also a way to get a point through to the mentally challenged. Winning!

 

[Idgit]

Which once again proves that he was drafted as a backup who would always be limited to touches, which means he was not drafted to supplant Murray.

Not sure I follow you. The fact that Randle is going to have a backup doesn't imply he was not drafted to be the starter. Every back in the league has somebody available to split carries with him.

The fact that Murray's not here in favor of the backs already on the roster should tell you whatever you need to know about their intentions. They had plenty of opportunities to add a RB in the draft if they really wanted to, and they did not.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That's something a coward says when he's losing the argument, especially since nobody here has proof of anything or else it wouldn't be under discussion. Repeating the same things is also a way to get a point through to the mentally challenged. Winning!

What exactly is cowardly about stating you haven't proven your premise? OTOH, I will say that the 'nothing is provable' nihilism is at the very heart of intellectual cowardice.

You have no basis to make claims about what the DMC signing means to the club regarding Randle. You have no basis to make claims about why they drafted Randle.

And repeating something over and over again is what stupid people and the mentally ill are known for doing. It is a common tactic to repeat something over and over again in place of proof. A stupid person certainly would try that tactic in teaching otoh it's well known that a different approach or perspective is typically in order when students are having difficulty understanding what you are teaching.