Archer: Cowboys have to 'put socks back on' all over again

[Cotton]

Cowboys have to 'put socks back on' all over again
January, 27, 2015

By Todd Archer | ESPNDallas.com

IRVING, Texas -- On Sunday, ESPN and Pro Football Focus unveiled a project to determine how close each team not in Super Bowl XLIX is to playing in the Super Bowl.

The Dallas Cowboys were deemed to be the closest of the 30 teams not in the Super Bowl. PFF graded the Cowboys with four elite players, eight good players, 16 average players and just two bad players.

But close is a relative term. Thirteen of the 30 players rated by PFF are set to be either restricted or unrestricted free agents. Teams change. Opponents change. What is true today won’t be true in September when the season begins.

“I think more so now than ever before,” tight end Jason Witten said, “I think we have an identity in which how we play. And I think that’s something that you feel like you’re building and can build upon. Coach [Jason] Garrett did a great job of kind of enforcing that, kind of laying out that as a blueprint week in, week out since April of what’s going to allow us to have success. Having said that, you start over. No team's the same, and so you have to build that again. I think it was good for us to taste that. It was good for guys to get back there.

“But I don’t think that says next year just roll the ball out and we’re going to do it again. No, you’ve got to do it all over again. I do think we’re good at the right positions that will allow us to have a chance to be successful.”

The Cowboys should have the best offensive line in the NFL with Tyron Smith, Travis Frederick and Zack Martin leading the group. Tony Romo had his best season. Dez Bryant, who is set to be a free agent, is among the best wide receivers, as is Witten among the best tight ends.

But then there’s DeMarco Murray. Like Bryant, he is set to be a free agent but there is no guarantee he will be back. If they have to use the franchise tag, it will be on Bryant.

If Murray leaves, the dynamics of the offense are sure to change. Maybe Joseph Randle can replace Murray. Or maybe Adrian Peterson, in fact, ends up a Cowboy. Or Mark Ingram. Or maybe some rookie. Maybe doesn’t fit into an equation.

And this is where "close to the Super Bowl," talk is not necessarily realistic. Thirteen of the 30 Cowboys graded by PFF are free agents, either restricted or unrestricted.

Eight of those 13 players are on the defensive side of the ball, including the leading tackler (Rolando McClain), leading interceptor (Bruce Carter) and second-leading sacker (Henry Melton). Key contributors like Anthony Spencer, Justin Durant and Sterling Moore (restricted) could hit the market to some degree.

When Garrett’s five-year extension was announced shortly after the Cowboys' season ended, he mentioned the word "build" in his opening statement.

“I think teams make mistakes when they say, ‘OK, we’re one player away,’” Garrett said. “I just think you’re continuing to try and build a football team. If we do that, right guys, the right way, that’s what gives us our best chance.”

The quick fix in free agency is sometimes never quick or a fix because the cost is so prohibitive. The Cowboys signed Brandon Carr in 2012 to a five-year, $50 million deal but he has not played to that level and entering his fourth year with the team he is looking at a pay-cut-or-be-cut scenario.

There is also the element of luck. Was it lucky that Tony Romo spun away from J.J. Watt and found Terrance Williams for a touchdown in the overtime win against the Houston Texans? Was it good fortune that the Cowboys were matched up with the dreadful AFC and NFC South divisions?

The Cowboys saw a bit of bad luck in the playoff loss to the Green Bay Packers when Bryant’s catch was overturned.

“Sometimes it’s the way the ball bounces,” Frederick said. “You’re on the sideline and you drop one and it might bounce out of bounds or it might bounce back in and the other team picks it up. There really is a bit of luck in there.”

Each year is a delicate balance of skill, luck, health and chemistry mixed in with a team’s ability.

The 2014 Cowboys were close to contending for the Super Bowl. That doesn’t mean the 2015 Cowboys will be close to competing for Super Bowl L.

“One of the things you learn early on in this game is if we brought back the exact same team, the exact same players, the exact same coaches and we got together on April 20 for the start of the offseason program, we have to start all over again,” Garrett said. “So I do believe that you get yourself to a point and the experiences that we’ve had up to this point are real ones and we can benefit from those experiences, actual game experiences, success and adversities and all that, so we start from that point but we have to get back to work.

“We have to put our socks back on and start from the ground floor and do it all over again. That’s an exciting thing.”

 

[ravidubey]

If you stay the same, you usually go backwards.

Jerry Jones proved that in the 1990's by sinking money into aging players and never replenishing or fostering competition.

Garrett is saying the exact right thing.

 

[boozeman]

“I think more so now than ever before,” tight end Jason Witten said, “I think we have an identity in which how we play. And I think that’s something that you feel like you’re building and can build upon. Coach [Jason] Garrett did a great job of kind of enforcing that, kind of laying out that as a blueprint week in, week out since April of what’s going to allow us to have success. Having said that, you start over. No team's the same, and so you have to build that again. I think it was good for us to taste that. It was good for guys to get back there.

That is a huge huge point. Continuity is fine, but if you don't have a direction and an identity, it is useless.

The thing now is not to eff it up. Keep the running game philosophy and have the right guys in place to make it happen.

If Murray leaves, the dynamics of the offense are sure to change. Maybe Joseph Randle can replace Murray. Or maybe Adrian Peterson, in fact, ends up a Cowboy. Or Mark Ingram. Or maybe some rookie. Maybe doesn’t fit into an equation.

There is no "maybe". Randle can't. Period.

If they mishandle this and think he can, it will be a disaster.

 

[ravidubey]

If they mishandle this and think he can, it will be a disaster.

Without a doubt this is Garrett's biggest personnel test to date. Jerral will look at Randle's average per carry and giggle to himself about his finding some draft steal. Garrett needs to set him straight about our needs at RB.

I also think re-signing Murray is a big mistake.

Stick with the run-first identity, which means two new strong runners and Randle relegated to 3rd string.

 

[boozeman]

Without a doubt this is Garrett's biggest personnel test to date. Jerral will look at Randle's average per carry and giggle to himself about his finding some draft steal. Garrett needs to set him straight about our needs at RB.

My biggest fear.

I also think re-signing Murray is a big mistake.

Not as big as handing Randle the starting job and expecting results even close to what Murray delivered.

 

[Texas Ace]

That is a huge huge point. Continuity is fine, but if you don't have a direction and an identity, it is useless.

The thing now is not to eff it up. Keep the running game philosophy and have the right guys in place to make it happen.

Yup.

It took a long ass time, but we finally have an identity, and more importantly, it's a successful identity that allows you to win games.

As you said, the key is to stick to this philosophy and reinforce it.

 

[ravidubey]

Not as big as handing Randle the starting job and expecting results even close to what Murray delivered.

Oh yeah, of course.

And it's not like I don't want Murray back... I love the guy, but he will A) cost too much and B) make the organization think it is set simply by re-signing him when the man needs added help from the draft.

 

[boozeman]

Yup.

It took a long ass time, but we finally have an identity, and more importantly, it's a successful identity that allows you to win games.

As you said, the key is to stick to this philosophy and reinforce it.

And get the right personnel to continue it. The Murray thing is huge. We need a bell cow, I firmly believe that.

 

[boozeman]

Oh yeah, of course.

And it's not like I don't want Murray back... I love the guy, but he will A) cost too much and B) make the organization think it is set simply by re-signing him when the man needs added help from the draft.

If they can get Murray back at a rate that doesn't kill us, I have no issues just letting the position stay put and let the draft decide if we get another guy.

If he goes, it becomes a priority IMO.

 

[ravidubey]

If they can get Murray back at a rate that doesn't kill us, I have no issues just letting the position stay put and let the draft decide if we get another guy.

If he goes, it becomes a priority IMO.

I think they need to draft someone regardless and Murray's absence just makes it an earlier pick.

Last year was a miracle, and Murray can't be asked to repeat that performance and Randle can't be relied upon to pick up the slack. There's also a chance Murray may miss games again.

 

[Carp]

I think they need to draft someone regardless and Murray's absence just makes it an earlier pick.

Last year was a miracle, and Murray can't be asked to repeat that performance and Randle can't be relied upon to pick up the slack. There's also a chance Murray may miss games again.

I think Randle can get more carries and hope he does. I really don't see the warts that you see, he is a quality back...certainly good enough the be the #2 and merit more carries.

 

[Texas Ace]

And get the right personnel to continue it. The Murray thing is huge. We need a bell cow, I firmly believe that.

I agree, which is why I don't want to do the committee thing.

It isn't just having a solid running game that made us so dangerous, it was having a guy capable of making a play when it needed to be made.

For whatever flaws he may have, the guy is tough as shit and knows how to get ugly yards. And while I hated his fumbles, I did appreciate his mental toughness and how he always bounced back from those fumbles to make a big play or keep producing afterwards.

So while the guy we have back there may not have to be an MVP candidate, we're going to be awfully sorry if we think that all we need is a guy to run through holes or a group of guys to duplicate the on-paper numbers.

We need some real talent at the position in order to have this offense function as it did this season and I hope this team understands that.

 

[Simpleton]

If they can get Murray back at a rate that doesn't kill us, I have no issues just letting the position stay put and let the draft decide if we get another guy.

If he goes, it becomes a priority IMO.

What is a reasonable rate to you?

I'm thinking the move is to just franchise Murray or give him something like 4 years, 25-30 million with a high guaranteed number in the first 2 years, and then be able to get out of it after the 2nd or 3rd year. Even if we are paying Murray a high per year number I think it is a win if the deal is only 4 years and we can get out of it rather easily after 3 years. Even though Murray will probably never have a year like he just had he should be able to give us a solid 1200-1500 yards and 8-12 TD's per year if healthy for at least 2, maybe 3 more years.

Then you back that up with drafting a guy in the 2nd-4th range who can keep Murray's workload down, serve as insurance in case of injury and then take over for him in 2-3 years.

 

[boozeman]

What is a reasonable rate to you?

I'm thinking the move is to just franchise Murray or give him something like 4 years, 25-30 million with a high guaranteed number in the first 2 years, and then be able to get out of it after the 2nd or 3rd year. Even if we are paying Murray a high per year number I think it is a win if the deal is only 4 years and we can get out of it rather easily after 3 years. Even though Murray will probably never have a year like he just had he should be able to give us a solid 1200-1500 yards and 8-12 TD's per year if healthy for at least 2, maybe 3 more years.

Then you back that up with drafting a guy in the 2nd-4th range who can keep Murray's workload down, serve as insurance in case of injury and then take over for him in 2-3 years.

There has to be a happy medium. I don't think Murray will play for a Knowshon Moreno 2014 contract.

4-32 is what Forte got a few years ago. I think that is reasonable. Some might disagree, but to me that is the going price for a feature running back.

The key as you said is the length of the deal and how it is structured.

Murray seems to be favored by Garrett and his teammates...and he seems to want to be in Dallas, at least from what he has been putting out there on social media.

 

[Simpleton]

There has to be a happy medium. I don't think Murray will play for a Knowshon Moreno 2014 contract.

4-32 is what Forte got a few years ago. I think that is reasonable. Some might disagree, but to me that is the going price for a feature running back.

The key as you said is the length of the deal and how it is structured.

Murray seems to be favored by Garrett and his teammates...and he seems to want to be in Dallas, at least from what he has been putting out there on social media.

The way I'm looking at it is if we can make some general upgrades to our defensive talent, square away the RB situation and stay healthy I think we are one of the top Super Bowl contenders in the league. As we all know our window is probably only 2-3 years with Romo so unless I was guaranteed that we could get Peterson it may be too much of a risk to gamble on a guy like Ingram and a rookie considering how reliant our offense should be on the running game.

I think 4/32 is fair as long as we put most of the guaranteed money in the first 2 years and we back it up with a solid prospect like Coleman, Abudallah, Ajayi, Cobb, Yeldon and so forth.

 

[Carp]

I don't know why I had it in my head that Forte got a 5/25 deal. 4/32 is fair, but I don't think there is any way Murray settles for that...I'd expect 4/36 to be his low end.

 

[Texas Ace]

There has to be a happy medium. I don't think Murray will play for a Knowshon Moreno 2014 contract.

4-32 is what Forte got a few years ago. I think that is reasonable. Some might disagree, but to me that is the going price for a feature running back.

The key as you said is the length of the deal and how it is structured.

Murray seems to be favored by Garrett and his teammates...and he seems to want to be in Dallas, at least from what he has been putting out there on social media.

I think he genuinely wants to stay here and it's not the typical PC stuff just to look good.

He's help build this nice foundation we've got going and I think he's smart enough to know he's in a good situation with Dez outside and this O-line in front of him. He also strikes me as a guy looking to get into stuff outside of football, and that becomes a lot easier to do when you're part of the most visible franchise in all of sports.

But with him, I think it's mostly about the football and he wants to be here if (and hopefully when) this team gets to the top of the mountain. He just isn't prepared to be low-balled in order to do that, and I don't think you can blame him.

 

[Simpleton]

I don't know why I had it in my head that Forte got a 5/25 deal. 4/32 is fair, but I don't think there is any way Murray settles for that...I'd expect 4/36 to be his low end.

I'd be truly shocked if someone gave him more than 9 a year, the only RB in recent memory who got more than that is Adrian Peterson and he is widely regarded as a once in a generation, HOF type of RB. It only takes one team of course but I really doubt anybody will give a guy coming off nearly 400 carries that much money, especially when you consider how much publicity our OL got.

 

[Carp]

I'd be truly shocked if someone gave him more than 9 a year, the only RB in recent memory who got more than that is Adrian Peterson and he is widely regarded as a once in a generation, HOF type of RB. It only takes one team of course but I really doubt anybody will give a guy coming off nearly 400 carries that much money, especially when you consider how much publicity our OL got.

Think about it though...every player looks at the previous number of the person before them and tries to better it.

 

[Simpleton]

Think about it though...every player looks at the previous number of the person before them and tries to better it.

Yea he may want that but I'd still be surprised if someone made him one of the highest paid RB's ever off basically 1-2 years of production considering how devalued the position has become, especially when everybody knows what kind of OL we have.

The fact that guys like Justin Forsett and CJ Anderson came out of nowhere this year and had huge years probably also factors in to teams thinking. Like I said though, it just takes one, but if I had to guess Murray will end up getting 7-9 a year.