The Murky Backfield

[jnday]

Doing an agent a favor by trying out Felix Jones doesn't mean anything. What some read into that was very surprising.

Felix is not the only one. How many favors does it take to get the hint ?

 

[gmoney112]

Which is, again, completely different than saying it was all because of Murray. What is "laughably incorrect" is the amount of posters downplaying what Murray did and then bringing up how any RB from the street can come in here and rush for over 1,000 yards behind our offensive line.

I think some believe to have the same success we did last year while having the same offensive philosophy, we'll need a competent RB in the backfield or at least RBs that play off each other better if we go the RBBC approach.

When a poster says they're concerned about 8-8 because we lost one player, they're insinuating that player was the reason we went 8-8. If they're actually serious about acknowledging the talent of the OL, then they wouldn't say we're going to be 8-8 again, when all other variables have remained constant except the subtraction of one asset.

Even hinting at 8-8 because we lost a RB is completely dismissing and insulting the development of the OL.

Not talking about you, but if you can't see that pattern in some posters you're either blind or unabashedly biased.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

-Uh, ok then."Not a single poster here has made it seem it was ALL Murray" really?. I was referring to the hundreds of threads about this subject.. not just this one. So please show me one post where Murray is mentioned how great he is and in the same breathe gives credit to the rest of the team for helping Murray with his accomplishments. The point you missed...Murray had a lot of help becoming the NFL's leading rusher. Is Murray good? sure. Is he great? nope. Hence why so many people were dreaming of a great RB (A.P.) to run behind this OL.
-There has been far more posters here making it seem as though our offensive line is some historic run blocking line- well, that's prob true.. I'm not real sure about the historic part, but I would bet it would be hard to find another OL rated #1 in the league at an average age under 25yo. My opinion, that's a pretty remarkable feat and the "potential" to be even better is worth mentioning anytime the RB conversation comes up..
- you overlooked the multiple posts here that stated ANY RB can have success behind our line. I have seen others state this. I didn't overlook this, I just don't think its worth mentioning such a ridiculous statement. The RB that will run behind this line has to have potential and be a good scheme fit. ALL the current RB's on the roster have the pedigree to be successful, exp behind our young, talented, and hungry OL. But when fans make crazy comments like this..



McFadden- injury prone just like Murray is. Has the Skill set and speed to be successful running behind our zone blocking scheme.(the same scheme he ran in college..btw) Should be a perfect fit for a one-cut downhill runner.
Randle- has been successful at every stop of his football career, yet people doubt him. Is shiftier, faster, and younger than Murray. Should be successful if he keeps his nose clean. (similar things were said ab Dez before he proved doubters wrong)
Williams- another injury guy with a ton of talent that can easily find success if healthy (I.e-Murray). There's some scouts that actually think he has the best chance to be the starter based on pure talent alone.
Dunbar- shifty, quick, and fast. Although I don't see him taking a lot of snaps, but I can see a Darren Sproles like role carved out for him. Change of pace back/ swing back at best.

I just don't see the sky falling like many here do. First, give these guys a chance. Williams was showing off in preseason last year, McFadden will finally have help on offense, and Randle needs to shut-up and continue to be successful on & off the field.

question: tell me, How successful would Murray have been if he was the RB in Oakland instead of McFadden... Guarantee he wouldn't have lead the league. let that sink in before calling McFadden crap.

oh yeah, thanks for tooting my horn

To the McFadden idolizers and the Murray fans:

So manys words and so little substinence. Yeah, it be easy to be there all knowing like Carson Daly easily diminishing . .. DIMINISHING!! . . . Murray's accomplishments. You say he would not be all good and stuff in Oakland. well duh, who would.
I am talking Dallas -- glamour team of the NFL -- with a good O line now and yes, last year, but McFadden if he be featured will i am sure be a 900-yard rusher and that will not do it. No sir!

It is easy to diminsh Murray there in your stratocaster lounger and a morning session of yoga, but do not be so quick to diminish Murray. Or try to diminish Murray. He gave it his all and gets this? He was a good citizen and role model for kids and Lee who did not play be the icon of this team?

Bizarro world. Grow up and give Murray his dew. He are callow and surely a McFadden fan.
But forgive me if I say that Murray is a giant -- even if he do not do well in Phuilly -- and McFadden is a midget.

And yes McFadden -- when it come to COWBOYS STANDARDS -- is crap.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

The Cowboys half a 1,800 yard rusher for the first time in how many years?

And we let him walk, saying McFadden will take up the slack.

Unbeliefable. Jerra half done many good things for the Cowboys lately. Letting Murray walk was not one of these. And since when is not halfing a good running game OK. huh?

 

[dallasdave]

The Cowboys half a 1,800 yard rusher for the first time in how many years?

And we let him walk, saying McFadden will take up the slack.

Unbeliefable. Jerra half done many good things for the Cowboys lately. Letting Murray walk was not one of these. And since when is not halfing a good running game OK. huh?

So what you are saying in these last 2 threads is Jerry should bring in Ray Rice

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

So what you are saying in these last 2 threads is Jerry should bring in Ray Rice

hail no!

 

[dallasdave]

hail no!

Come on Gimme you know Ray knows how to lay the smack down

 

[big dog cowboy]

Felix is not the only one.

I know there were others. But I also know there was a zero percent chance of any of them getting signed. That was what made everything seem so wierd. Actually it was kind of embarrassing.

 

[mattjames2010]

When a poster says they're concerned about 8-8 because we lost one player, they're insinuating that player was the reason we went 8-8. If they're actually serious about acknowledging the talent of the OL, then they wouldn't say we're going to be 8-8 again, when all other variables have remained constant except the subtraction of one asset.

Even hinting at 8-8 because we lost a RB is completely dismissing and insulting the development of the OL.

Not talking about you, but if you can't see that pattern in some posters you're either blind or unabashedly biased.

But again, who has said this? Who has said losing Murray would automatically lead to an 8-8 season? It seems those who liked Murray would have been satisfied if we brought in a reliable replacement or drafted a young talent,

If someone has said Murray was the reason we went 12-4 and without him, despite a reliable replacement and pieces added to the defense and offensive line, they are obviously wrong. My issue since responding to the poster is the fact that, if someone actually did say that, it's obviously in no way the opinion of the majority. So, it's either an exaggeration of what others have stated, or he was addressing a single poster.

The majority seem to think any RB can be put behind this line and have success. That's what should be addressed, and a few here have attempted before being drowned out.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Seriously the guy is a better blocker and faster runner than the rest and is good in the passing game.

Calf implants.

 

[dallasdave]

Calf implants.

Where are you going with this ?

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Where are you going with this ?

Trying to make DMF haters like him?? Lol

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I really tired of discussing this topic as well, but for all the folks saying that we will be just fine and it was mainly the offensive line opening up the holes for Murray.........just keep this in mind...................

With the exception of McFadden (who signed for $0 guaranteed money) all the current RBs were on the team last year and the decision was made to offer Murray $6 million a season (top 5 RB money in the league).

Why would the team do this? Why offer Murray top 5 RB money if the guys behind him on the depth chart could do just as good a job? The team wasn't offering top 5 money for the hell of it, they obviously viewed something about Murray that they thought was worth top 5 money, even if all the other RBs already on the roster.


And if Murray would have signed for $6 million a season, does anybody really think Murray would be splitting first team snaps with anybody?...................Hell no, Murray would still be the bellcow and you would hear no talk of RBBC.

I think he would be because I don't believe there is any way that Murray could follow the season he just had (number of carries) with anything close to what we saw last year. I think that either way, Murray would have been splitting carries. You almost have to because if you don't, by 2016, he's done if you don't spread the load and then you have a significant amount of cap money invested in a back that is used up. JMO

 

[xwalker]

Felix is not the only one. How many favors does it take to get the hint ?

Being on good terms with agents can be very helpful. That played a big part in Collins signing with the Cowboys. The Cowboys drafted Gregory after Gregory basically begged them to take him and the agent seemed to be happy that the Cowboys ended his slide down the draft board. That same agent represented Collins and was already happy with the Cowboys for taking Gregory.

Agents also give teams they like info during the draft on which other teams are interested in their player. This is one of they ways that teams determine which teams they think will draft a player that they are hoping slides to them. It's also a big reason why teams know when to trade up for players.

There is a list of several other reasons why staying on good terms with agents can be helpful to teams.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Come on Gimme you know Ray knows how to lay the smack down

groan.

I will say dis for Ray: His time be over. His forturnes are way behind him.

 

[SouthernOregonStud]

When a poster says they're concerned about 8-8 because we lost one player, they're insinuating that player was the reason we went 8-8. If they're actually serious about acknowledging the talent of the OL, then they wouldn't say we're going to be 8-8 again, when all other variables have remained constant except the subtraction of one asset.

Even hinting at 8-8 because we lost a RB is completely dismissing and insulting the development of the OL.

Not talking about you, but if you can't see that pattern in some posters you're either blind or unabashedly biased.

Starting this thread may be a groaner or just more of the same, however, as can be seen here, I think the point was some how missed! I don't think I've seen anyone say that just because we lost "Murray" we will go 8-8..... I'm not saying I haven't seen posters that are more concerned with the unknown, at the RB position, this coming season. It's great, awesome in fact, that we addressed the defense & sure my hope, it shakes out great & we win games we would have otherwise lost, with a better D! I think my biggest, concern, is what a great job we did in addressing so many "Skill" positions, in the draft, possibly one for the ages, yet, after it all, it didn't seem like the FO felt like making the RB position a priority. A priority to get, acquire, a skilled, better than average, every down, primary running back.
Now, hey, it could go great, or it could go wrong, my greatest worry is if it does go wrong, I don't think we will have an easy go of addressing it, once it's gone wrong. I do specifically mean that in the example "Going Wrong" is the bad side of this "What If" & it means we are losing games because of our inability to do most things, in the run game, consistently well. Such as, the dirty yards, those 3rd & 2 Or 2 & 4 Or 3rd & Goal, catching screens out of the back field, pass blocking, overall scheme fit? It's this reason, the unknown's about the RB's we currently have & how they will fare in these skill set areas! As to the "Why" I used the word "Murky" in creating this thread, well, as far as thinking we will go 8-8 just because we lost one player, that's definitely not my viewpoint. However, if we are, say, 4-4 & it's glaringly obvious that the running game is an issue, inconsistent, is the overall term used, in multiple areas of concern, I promise not to say it's because we lost Murray. I can't say I won't be asking about the FO, why they didn't see the need for a better fit earlier on, maybe at that time it's a combination of things, possible play calling? Sure, some are unknowns, but I'm in the camp that, has high hopes it all turns out well, in what looks "Murky", at least for now & if it doesn't work, I won't say I said so. Am I concerned? Sure.

 

[gimmesix]

My opinion of the RB group in Dallas this year is it's a collection of crap. If they produce with these guys then it forever puts to bed the RB/OL debate.

I don't necessarily agree with you. I believe it takes both and if we produce with the guys we have it will both because of their talent and because of the line.

My biggest issue with this group isn't that the backs don't have talent. McFadden averaged more than 5 yards per carry in his two biggest season; Randle averaged 6.7 in his minor backup role.

My biggest issue is what else we know about them. McFadden also has struggled the last three seasons and had health issues throughout his career. Expecting him to stay healthy at this point in his career is not a good bet.

Williams showed the talent that got him drafted in the second round last preseason, but health has kept his career from even getting started. Expecting him to stay healthy might be a worse bet than McFadden.

Randle showed he has talent last season, but has only played a very small role so far in Dallas. Can he handle a heavy load? Can he thrive when he's the focal point and when boxes are stacked to stop him on first down?

Too many questions for my taste, but that doesn't mean these guys don't have ability. It just means Dallas is taking some chances that I'm not comfortable with the Cowboys taking when we were so close to getting to the NFC championship game last year.

If the running game fails, the passing game and defense will have to make up for what it provided last year.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Romo isn't the same Romo as years ago. If we place more pressure on Romo to scramble around and make plays to win games, I am not sure we will be as successful as we were in years past..... Its a different Romo. I have noticed a fairly significant change not only in his play, arm strength, but also in his personality.......He isn't that same QB we watched in 200x -2013....

And, it will place him in the "Danger Zone" more and more.....

If I am a defensive coordinator and its crunch time, I say let McFadden, Williams or Randle beat us.....were taking out Romo and company....

If I am linebacker...same thing.

Its inches...I know. But they add up. And unless the Defense becomes one of the best in the league this year(and I am not discounting that), we need that Offense to perform at a high level. Murray was a big part of that......and not just with regard to the Stats......

 

[gmoney112]

Starting this thread may be a groaner or just more of the same, however, as can be seen here, I think the point was some how missed! I don't think I've seen anyone say that just because we lost "Murray" we will go 8-8..... I'm not saying I haven't seen posters that are more concerned with the unknown, at the RB position, this coming season. It's great, awesome in fact, that we addressed the defense & sure my hope, it shakes out great & we win games we would have otherwise lost, with a better D! I think my biggest, concern, is what a great job we did in addressing so many "Skill" positions, in the draft, possibly one for the ages, yet, after it all, it didn't seem like the FO felt like making the RB position a priority. A priority to get, acquire, a skilled, better than average, every down, primary running back.
Now, hey, it could go great, or it could go wrong, my greatest worry is if it does go wrong, I don't think we will have an easy go of addressing it, once it's gone wrong. I do specifically mean that in the example "Going Wrong" is the bad side of this "What If" & it means we are losing games because of our inability to do most things, in the run game, consistently well. Such as, the dirty yards, those 3rd & 2 Or 2 & 4 Or 3rd & Goal, catching screens out of the back field, pass blocking, overall scheme fit? It's this reason, the unknown's about the RB's we currently have & how they will fare in these skill set areas! As to the "Why" I used the word "Murky" in creating this thread, well, as far as thinking we will go 8-8 just because we lost one player, that's definitely not my viewpoint. However, if we are, say, 4-4 & it's glaringly obvious that the running game is an issue, inconsistent, is the overall term used, in multiple areas of concern, I promise not to say it's because we lost Murray. I can't say I won't be asking about the FO, why they didn't see the need for a better fit earlier on, maybe at that time it's a combination of things, possible play calling? Sure, some are unknowns, but I'm in the camp that, has high hopes it all turns out well, in what looks "Murky", at least for now & if it doesn't work, I won't say I said so. Am I concerned? Sure.

I never said it was you, or mattjames. However, there are definitely posters in just about every thread who have implied constantly that unless we sign/trade for an equivalent of "Murray", we're going to be 8-8. They absolutely refuse to believe there was any other variable outside of handing Murray the foosball as to why we won games, when anyone with 2 eyes could see that the reason we were 8-8 in 2013 was because we probably set an NFL record in front 7 injuries on defense and had one of the worst defenses in statistical history.

Even when we weren't running as much, we could have won 10 games fairly easily if our defense or OL was worth a flip.

 

[jrumann59]

http://www.inquisitr.com/2137416/da...g-backs-list-with-adrian-peterson-trade-dead/

That site has a lot of crap that loads in the background.