Top 3 you would keep...

[Cowboysrock55]

There is enough credit to go around for the OL and Murray. If one is propped it does not minimize the other. Murray has shown to be productive, when healthy and given the chance, but he is definitely benefiting from a philosophy change and an outstanding OL. The best part of this is that some parts look interchangeable. Parnell came in and did a good job filling in for Free...still would rather have Free out there, but injuries are part of the game. Murray has not gotten hurt, but Randle has done well when given carries. I don't want to heap too much praise on either Murray or the OL...to me it is the scheme and philosophy that are winning out, the players are just executing it.

It's like the stupid old debates that would come up about Emmitt. He was an elite back running behind an elite O-line.

 

[L.T. Fan]

It's like the stupid old debates that would come up about Emmitt. He was an elite back running behind an elite O-line.

True enough but this is now a situation in uncharted water and if it continues then it will have to be reevaluated as to cause and effect. Frankly i think too many are regarding Murray a little to lightly.

 

[Carp]

True enough but this is now a situation in uncharted water and if it continues then it will have to be reevaluated as to cause and effect. Frankly i think too many are regarding Murray a little to lightly.

The RB position is just not a longterm part of a team anymore, it really is not about Murray.

 

[L.T. Fan]

The RB position is just not a longterm part of a team anymore, it really is not about Murray.

This year's production and records are. That's where I am coming from.

 

[Carp]

This year's production and records are. That's where I am coming from.

Yep. Murray is having a great year. You do have to look beyond the present though.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Yep. Murray is having a great year. You do have to look beyond the present though.

A far as the keepers go I think you have a two tier process. Tier 1 would be a two year evaluation as to mediate return group then the next tier for long term retention. My tier 1 would be Romo, Bryant and Murray. Tier 2 would be Bryant, Fredrickson and Smith.

 

[NoDak]

Yep. Murray is having a great year. You do have to look beyond the present though.

Why? As fans, we have no bearing on what happens in the future. We can only cheer for the present and rehash the past.

 

[Smitty]

Not sure why we are hung up on Costa, Kosier, and Holland...

Because I said it was more the OL than Murray, and someone countered that Murray averaged 5.5 in 2011 behind those 3 linemen, in an attempt to point out that it's not the OL and all Murray ever needed was more carries.

Which is wrong because he never would have sustained that ypc with more carries behind those 3 guys.

 

[Smitty]

It's like the stupid old debates that would come up about Emmitt. He was an elite back running behind an elite O-line.

It's not stupid, because you have to decide who is more important to pay sometimes.

That being said, I've said a couple times in this thread that it's a combo of a Pro Bowl caliber back behind a dominant OL.

But the OL is still more important.

 

[Smitty]

The RB position is just not a longterm part of a team anymore, it really is not about Murray.

True. No one is saying Murray is not a good back or that anyone could do this same thing.

But if you're not an elite back, and you are running behind an elite OL like here in Dallas, then the position just doesn't carry as much value bc the OL does more of the work towards that production.

 

[NoDak]

Which is wrong because he never would have sustained that ypc with more carries behind those 3 guys.

He sustained that avg for nearly 200 carries.

You have no idea whether or not he would have kept that up or not. You dismiss other people's opinions while stating yours as fact.

 

[Smitty]

He sustained that avg for nearly 200 carries.

The running game was not featured at the time due to its well documented struggles. Teams were not loading up to stop it like they are now... And we're still having success.

You have no idea whether or not he would have kept that up or not. You dismiss other people's opinions while stating yours as fact.

Of course I have "an idea." I have the an idea that Kosier Holland and Costa could not have anchored this run game as well as Frederick Martin and Leary the same way I have an idea that Quincy Carter could not have led a dominant passing game as well as Tony Romo.

I might not have definitive proof but neither does anyone else. And the fact that those three guys were terrible leans the evidence one way.

And the day that I see Iamtdg state his opinion not as fact on this subject, will be the first.

 

[L.T. Fan]

He sustained that avg for nearly 200 carries.

You have no idea whether or not he would have kept that up or not. You dismiss other people's opinions while stating yours as fact.

Murray's college average was essentially the same if anyone would like to take a peek. He has been consistent regardless of what OL he runs behind. The line didn't make Muray, he has always been a producer.

 

[NoDak]

So yeah, stating your opinion as fact. Like I said.

But, throwing in Quincy to try and bolster your argument was a nice touch.

 

[Smitty]

So yeah, stating your opinion as fact. Like I said.

Plenty of others do the same.

 

[Carp]

Why? As fans, we have no bearing on what happens in the future. We can only cheer for the present and rehash the past.

And?

 

[Carp]

A far as the keepers go I think you have a two tier process. Tier 1 would be a two year evaluation as to mediate return group then the next tier for long term retention. My tier 1 would be Romo, Bryant and Murray. Tier 2 would be Bryant, Fredrickson and Smith.

I'd keep Smith over Murray for this year...he had a bad game last week, but if he went down that would put Romo in some peril.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I'd keep Smith over Murray for this year...he had a bad game last week, but if he went down that would put Romo in some peril.

By having him in the the second tier I was implying that group is a given for keepers. The first tier is more of a reference of players that produce now but are subject to being changed within the next couple of years via contract circumstances or replacement earmarks.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

It's not stupid, because you have to decide who is more important to pay sometimes.

That being said, I've said a couple times in this thread that it's a combo of a Pro Bowl caliber back behind a dominant OL.

But the OL is still more important.

You also think Giovani Bernard may be able to do the same stuff behind this line...

If we are talking about signing players that's a totally different discussion. RB's just don't have the same shelf life that O-lineman have. I'd be hesitant to sign a RB long term no matter how good he is.

 

[Carp]

By having him in the the second tier I was implying that group is a given for keepers. The first tier is more of a reference of players that produce now but are subject to being changed within the next couple of years via contract circumstances or replacement earmarks.

Yeah...I am talking about this year.