Tony Pollard is the best weapon on this team, Zeke is the best RB

[SteveTheCowboy]

Not as a WR, as a RB.
Huge difference.

does it really matter? If you line up as RB or WR...if you catch a designed play from the QB?

Tony might line up as a RB but he sure as HE LLl does scramble away from our o line like a ** er. Running or catching.

We experimented running him up the middle against the eagles and we saw how that went.

 

[ConstantReboot]

There may be some, but fans always see replacing players as a lot easier than it is. Remember when Bo Scarbrough was some great late-round find? Or how about Mike Weber of Darius Jackson? Joseph Randle good enough for you?

Out of eight backs taken by us since 2011 (when we got Murray), only three have had much success (Elliott, Murray and Pollard). Now, all three of those were the only ones taken before the fifth round, but either we've been real lucky or real good at drafting because not every team can say that.

What I really meant to say was that someone that does what Elliott does can easily be replaced by an UDFA. Right now Elliott runs of the middle, gaining the tough yards, and not really asked to carry the team anymore. He used to. Someone like a Bo Scarbrough can handle that load. Just because he was UDFA doesn't mean he can't be a starter. I believe he went onto playing with either the Lions or the Seahawks as a starter at one point.

Runningbacks are a dime a dozen these days. We don't even need to spend a 1st rounder like what we did with Elliott. We can get one 3rd or 4th round and they can carry the load.

 

[gimmesix]

What I really meant to say was that someone that does what Elliott does can easily be replaced by an UDFA. Right now Elliott runs of the middle, gaining the tough yards, and not really asked to carry the team anymore. He used to. Someone like a Bo Scarbrough can handle that load. Just because he was UDFA doesn't mean he can't be a starter. I believe he went onto playing with either the Lions or the Seahawks as a starter at one point.

And what I meant to say is you're delusional.

 

[ConstantReboot]

And what I meant to say is you're delusional.

LOL whatever....yes Elliott can easily be replaced and will be after this year. He is finished.

 

[gimmesix]

LOL whatever....yes Elliott can easily be replaced and will be after this year. He is finished.

He may be replaced because Pollard is the more dynamic back and we'd rather pay him than pay Elliott, but it won't be by a UDFA or late-round pick. If Dallas decides to part ways with Elliott, it will take a running back within the first four rounds of this next draft, and I believe it will be within the first three rounds. There's no guarantees, but we stand a much better shot at finding someone capable of playing in this league if we do that. You don't seem to understand the number of drafted backs who fail in this league. Go back and look at any year and you've got far more backs who either never play or average less than 3 yards and are out of the league after three years than prove to be even a capable No. 2 back.

I like this Malik Davis kid we picked up, but the reality is it's quite likely that he'll never amount to much in this league.

 

[ConstantReboot]

He may be replaced because Pollard is the more dynamic back and we'd rather pay him than pay Elliott, but it won't be by a UDFA or late-round pick. If Dallas decides to part ways with Elliott, it will take a running back within the first four rounds of this next draft, and I believe it will be within the first three rounds. There's no guarantees, but we stand a much better shot at finding someone capable of playing in this league if we do that. You don't seem to understand the number of drafted backs who fail in this league. Go back and look at any year and you've got far more backs who either never play or average less than 3 yards and are out of the league after three years than prove to be even a capable No. 2 back.

I like this Malik Davis kid we picked up, but the reality is it's quite likely that he'll never amount to much in this league.

I believe that it will be a top round pick that we will use to replace Elliott and I'm hoping we use at least a 2nd to get a replacement for Elliott.

I'm not saying we should draft an UDFA to replace Elliott. I'm saying that way Elliott is producing is that it can be replicated by an UDFA. Zeke has lost his speed and his ability to break tackles. Aside from his blocking ability, what else can he do better than what a late rounder or an UDFA can't do?

 

[BAT]

 

[noshame]

Zeke at FB, RB
Pollard at RB, Slot.

 

[DanA]

There may be some, but fans always see replacing players as a lot easier than it is. Remember when Bo Scarbrough was some great late-round find? Or how about Mike Weber of Darius Jackson? Joseph Randle good enough for you?

Out of eight backs taken by us since 2011 (when we got Murray), only three have had much success (Elliott, Murray and Pollard). Now, all three of those were the only ones taken before the fifth round, but either we've been real lucky or real good at drafting because not every team can say that.

I’d contest the notion that we’ve punched above our weight drafting running backs. In terms of draft capital expenditure, pick 4 is a huge investment.

The blue print for success seems to be using 2-3 picks in the 2nd - 4th rounds with one of them hitting, and then letting them walk after their rookie contract….exactly what we did with Demarco Murray and likely Pollard. Zeke has simply been a bad investment and classic example of a sunk cost trap.

 

[JBond]

Zeke = FB

Pollard = HB

Different positions.

 

[G2]

does it really matter? If you line up as RB or WR...if you catch a designed play from the QB?

Tony might line up as a RB but he sure as HE LLl does scramble away from our o line like a ** er. Running or catching.

We experimented running him up the middle against the eagles and we saw how that went.

Yes. It matters. Sorry if it bothers you. I'm getting ahead of this potential derailing. If my opinion of facts I've gathered bothers you, move the F on and stop responding.

I'll lay this out and then I'm done because you're a lowkey contrarian w/ all my posts.

Pollard was drafted as a RB, taking valuable passing opportunities away from our WRs is nonsense. We need both RBs and a balance play call ration. We can't take away running plays to give to Pollard because he was a WR in college and somehow in considered an NFL WR. A couple dump off passes in the flats if fine.
Your third sentence is a mess. Your point on Philly is short-sighted.

That is all.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Yes. It matters. Sorry if it bothers you. I'm getting ahead of this potential derailing. If my opinion of facts I've gathered bothers you, move the F on and stop responding.

I'll lay this out and then I'm done because you're a lowkey contrarian w/ all my posts.

Pollard was drafted as a RB, taking valuable passing opportunities away from our WRs is nonsense. We need both RBs and a balance play call ration. We can't take away running plays to give to Pollard because he was a WR in college and somehow in considered an NFL WR. A couple dump off passes in the flats if fine.
Your third sentence is a mess. Your point on Philly is short-sighted.

That is all.

And you are an immature child lashing out a good forum members because they don;t see things YOUR way.

I was very civil and respectful in my comment. You?