The Great Running Back Debate

[Beast_from_East]

Good debate..............I guess we shall see if our current group of RBs can get the job done or not. That is the beauty of sports, there is no guessing involved. Either McFadden and Randle can effectively replace Murray or they cant.

We will find out week 1

 

[Nightman]

Good debate..............I guess we shall see if our current group of RBs can get the job done or not. That is the beauty of sports, there is no guessing involved. Either McFadden and Randle can effectively replace Murray or they cant.

We will find out week 1

The beauty is that I wanted to keep Murray, but now I hope he is a bust and that McRandliamsbar does the job.

In other words, now I am rooting to be wrong.

 

[AdamJT13]

I don't actually know if the passing game correlations hold up for that early 90s era.

Yes, it did. I started passing and rushing tracking correlations myself in the early 1990s and was posting about it on Usenet by 1998, before I had ever read any of the mounds of supporting evidence that other research has found. The team that passed more effectively won about 80 percent of the time, even back then.

Also, keep in mind that Bud Goode was using yards per pass differential as his "Killer Stat" as early as the late 1970s, and The Hidden Game of Football (which touted the significance of adjusted yards per pass) was published in 1988.

 

[jday]

Just thought i'd throw this out there.....

.


FootballOutsiders could be right. I honestly am on the fence with this team right now. The front office has been pretty on point with their decision making thus far so they have earned a small degree of trust. For one, you could make the argument that with an improved pass rush alone, the need for last year's production in the running game is considerably reduced. But if you take off the kool aid goggles for just a moment and look at it logically, the Cowboys sudden emergence from mediocrity in a year where they on paper were predicted to fail epically was heralded in by a significantly improved running game. Clearly, Zach Martin played a significant part in that. But a healthy Demarco did too. He was also a significant contributor when healthy in previous seasons before Martin and Frederick. And in those games where he was effective the Cowboys win percentages improved drastically. Now, we don't have him; which I am on record as saying I'm okay with. He wanted too much for too long and very well may lose a step as a result of how much the Cowboys leaned on him last season. With the crutch removed, you would think the Cowboys would attempt to either upgrade or at least maintain the status quo. Instead, they are ripping up that blue print and moving on to a new one; the by committee approach. It very well could work, but why after finally getting that identity back after years and years and years of straying from it and trying it a different away without much success would you say, "to hell with it, let's try something new!?"

 

[windjc]

.


FootballOutsiders could be right. I honestly am on the fence with this team right now. The front office has been pretty on point with their decision making thus far so they have earned a small degree of trust. For one, you could make the argument that with an improved pass rush alone, the need for last year's production in the running game is considerably reduced. But if you take off the kool aid goggles for just a moment and look at it logically, the Cowboys sudden emergence from mediocrity in a year where they on paper were predicted to fail epically was heralded in by a significantly improved running game. Clearly, Zach Martin played a significant part in that. But a healthy Demarco did too. He was also a significant contributor when healthy in previous seasons before Martin and Frederick. And in those games where he was effective the Cowboys win percentages improved drastically. Now, we don't have him; which I am on record as saying I'm okay with. He wanted too much for too long and very well may lose a step as a result of how much the Cowboys leaned on him last season. With the crutch removed, you would think the Cowboys would attempt to either upgrade or at least maintain the status quo. Instead, they are ripping up that blue print and moving on to a new one; the by committee approach. It very well could work, but why after finally getting that identity back after years and years and years of straying from it and trying it a different away without much success would you say, "to hell with it, let's try something new!?"

The "committee" approach is what they had before Demarco stepped up to an elite starter role. Its just a catch phrase for "we don't know who our starter will be."

What do people want the Cowboys to do?
A. Not draft Jones or Gregory?
B. Reach for a RB in the draft that they had a lower grade on in rounds 3-7?
C. Trade for a RB?
D. Mold a RB from clay using magic gloves?

I'm not sure what we expect the front office to do?

 

[big dog cowboy]

They didn't need Murray this season.

They didn't need him as much as they leaned on him last year. Randall should have had more carries.

 

[jnday]

The "committee" approach is what they had before Demarco stepped up to an elite starter role. Its just a catch phrase for "we don't know who our starter will be."

What do people want the Cowboys to do?
A. Not draft Jones or Gregory?
B. Reach for a RB in the draft that they had a lower grade on in rounds 3-7?
C. Trade for a RB?
D. Mold a RB from clay using magic gloves?

I'm not sure what we expect the front office to do?

I expected a better plan to be in place if they was going to let Murray walk. I don't think that is asking much when you lose a player that had the impact on the offense to the extent Murray had. The current RBs on the roster is not a plan. It is a hope and a prayer .

 

[dallasdave]

I expected a better plan to be in place if they was going to let Murray walk. I don't think that is asking much when you lose a player that had the impact on the offense to the extent Murray had. The current RBs on the roster is not a plan. It is a hope and a prayer .

I agree, because I want the Cowboys to win the Super Bowl this year and the best way to do that is have a dominant RB, which we don't have. Last year was good and we had a dominant RB. GET AP and improve the chances to win the Super Bowl. Yes, it is that simple.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I agree, because I want the Cowboys to win the Super Bowl this year and the best way to do that is have a dominant RB, which we don't have. Last year was good and we had a dominant RB. GET AP and improve the chances to win the Super Bowl. Yes, it is that simple.

Don't forget, if the Cowboys thought we needed a dominant RB they could have had one at any time. Resign Murray or in the draft. They passed on all chances. Doesn't that tell you something?

 

[dallasdave]

Don't forget, if the Cowboys thought we needed a dominant RB they could have had one at any time. Resign Murray or in the draft. They passed on all chances. Doesn't that tell you something?

The convicts are running the prison ?

 

[jobberone]

I expected a better plan to be in place if they was going to let Murray walk. I don't think that is asking much when you lose a player that had the impact on the offense to the extent Murray had. The current RBs on the roster is not a plan. It is a hope and a prayer .

You can't bake more pie nor enlarge the one you have. Injuries, retirements, suspensions etc happen. Players come out of nowhere to fill a need. Players you count on if not injured etc have poorer seasons than many suspected.

It's a dynamic game on and off the field. You can plan but you can't plan for it all.

And sometimes you have to settle for a Camry when you want a Ferrari.

 

[jobberone]

The Cowboys wanted Murray to stay but he was too expensive for too long to allow them to pay for all the other positions that needed to be addressed.

They are betting they can replace him with niche players. That has pros and cons.

And you won't know after one game but maybe 1/4 a season and certainly 1/2 of one.

 

[dallasdave]

I never said it requires a superstar. I don't view Demarco Murray as a superstar and thing's worked out pretty well in this system for him last year.

As for your assertion that my comment was a "dumb strawman argument":

Great post !!!

 

[dallasdave]

Talk to you about what? The fact that you really don't know what a straw man argument is? Funny you should mention it, your response indicating I said we need a Super Star at rb is a perfect example of a straw man argument.

About xwalker sig? I'm afraid a picture of 1 play out of an entire season doesn't quite prove much. I will admit though in that one play the blocking was great. But for that 1 play though, I could probably produce 10 where the blocking was nowhere close to that good, were I so inclined...which I'm not so please don't ask.

Or about the potential of the Cowboys getting by on what they have? I acknowledge the Cowboys may just be smarter than the rest of the league, the media, the fans and the expert's. It wouldn't be the first time the Cowboys proved they knew something we don't. That's fair. But for now, I have my reservations.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Don't forget, if the Cowboys thought we needed a dominant RB they could have had one at any time. Resign Murray or in the draft. They passed on all chances. Doesn't that tell you something?

I was listening to Talkin Cowboys and they pretty much said Dallas was going to draft a RB in the 2nd round but when Gregory was still sitting there, they could not pass on him.

That tells me they are not 100% sold on McFadden and Randle.

 

[Beast_from_East]

The Cowboys wanted Murray to stay but he was too expensive for too long to allow them to pay for all the other positions that needed to be addressed.

They are betting they can replace him with niche players. That has pros and cons.

And you won't know after one game but maybe 1/4 a season and certainly 1/2 of one.

Its defiently a roll of the dice...........I heard on the radio that no team in NFL history has ever let the NFL rushing champion walk out the door in the offseason. This will be the first time an NFL rushing champion defends his title in another uniform.

This is a big gamble by the front office and if our running game takes a step back (along with our record), they will be criticized harshly by fans and the media.

 

[Idgit]

Yes, it did. I started passing and rushing tracking correlations myself in the early 1990s and was posting about it on Usenet by 1998, before I had ever read any of the mounds of supporting evidence that other research has found. The team that passed more effectively won about 80 percent of the time, even back then.

Also, keep in mind that Bud Goode was using yards per pass differential as his "Killer Stat" as early as the late 1970s, and The Hidden Game of Football (which touted the significance of adjusted yards per pass) was published in 1988.

I love the idea of you debating this over Usenet.

Thanks for the info. I thought maybe in an era where you could hit the QB and cover more agressively the effects might not have been as pronounced. Still, those 90s teams threw it well and played good defense, too.

 

[Idgit]

If you will notice, this team has been built using the 90's teams as a model. Just because fans and the media label the league as a passing league , it doesn't change the fact that physical, ball control, running teams can not win. The style of the 90's teams win in any era IMO. In this offense, the RB is still a very important position. Before comparing this team to other teams, that has to be considered. The difference between 8-8 and 12-4 was the running game. The defense appeared to be better on paper, but the fact that they wasn't on the field and there was less chance of them being exposed made them look better than they really was. It takes both the line and a good RB to maintain the progress they made last year. If the running game is not as old, the defense will be exposed and a couple rookies are not going to make much difference. I don't think the starting RB is on the roster yet. I would think that the powers that be in Dallas is smarter than to go with what they have. If not, they are just trending water and not making progress.

We had the most efficient QB in the league. And we played better defense. That's the reason we won more of those tight games we lost by such thin margins the year prior.

The rushing success in short yardage helped us avoid some passing mistakes we made in years prior. That improvement helped, but the real benefit came from the better defensive play. And that was better series by series and quarter by quarter. It wasn't the result of just the time of possession difference.

If the team thought the RB were the important piece, we'd have addressed it. We drafted defense and signed a pass rush in free agency. It's going to pay off.

 

[windward]

No, a great running game is a combination of both. Emmitt held out for two games and proved a point. A great line can't do it without a quality RB. This line, or any line for that matter, can't make a JAG RB great. Randle benefitted from a few longer runs after Murray had wore the defense down.

Not having Emmitt wasn't the reason we lost those games. Having 8 turnovers and Lin Elliott missing 2 fgs and an extra point will do that however. At a minimum, we should have beat Buffalo and the Commanders game should have gone down to the wire.

Derrick Lassic wasn't a bad running back. He averaged over 4 YPC in 2 of his three starts. probably would have had over 1000 yards over the entire year. He wasn't Emmitt but who was? Emmitt was an all time great, Murray wasn't.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Don't forget, if the Cowboys thought we needed a dominant RB they could have had one at any time. Resign Murray or in the draft. They passed on all chances. Doesn't that tell you something?[/quote]

It does. It tells me that the didn't consider what JG or Romo think about how much a very good back means to the style of play
that has been built here. It tells me that they are hoping the defense will actually be better and not be covered up by a great running attack. With the signings we made it should work on the defensive side. But if none of the RBs are worth a salt,
hello Romo's arm and we are back to praying