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

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,759
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.
Then you have to look at how many teams are willing to make the running game the focal point to the extent they want to pay like that and of course, who has the room.

The only place I see where the run game will be featured where there is not a top shelf back in place already is Buffalo. Ryan is going to push hard for that guy IMO, even though they have Jackson.

There are a handful of other teams like Oakland, the Jets and especially Jacksonville that might want to and can afford to throw money at him. A team like Indy might, but may not be in a position to make an offer sweet enough.

Overall, you just will have teams shuffling guys around, trading one free agent for another.

I think the market is thin and if Murray's inclination is to not be motivated by a few extra million a year, he'll be reasonable.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
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.
I'd also like him to get more carries because we need to spread the ball regardless, but I think we need more competition for #2RB. Randle should have been at his best in his second year but was still too far behind Murray.

This team should be the gold standard for RB's.
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.
Yep. Even the stupid teams like Raiders and Jags look like they might stop giving out really dumb contracts. There's still the Bucs.

I think Murray would be perfect anywhere in the AFC North, but only maybe the Browns are dumb enough to overpay a RB.
 
Last edited:

Chocolate Lab

Mere Commoner
Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
19,859
If we bring this guy back, I don't see how you can say anything has changed with this organization.

If you think you have to sign back everyone who got you to a good year, what's different?
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Then you have to look at how many teams are willing to make the running game the focal point to the extent they want to pay like that and of course, who has the room.

The only place I see where the run game will be featured where there is not a top shelf back in place already is Buffalo. Ryan is going to push hard for that guy IMO, even though they have Jackson.

There are a handful of other teams like Oakland, the Jets and especially Jacksonville that might want to and can afford to throw money at him. A team like Indy might, but may not be in a position to make an offer sweet enough.

Overall, you just will have teams shuffling guys around, trading one free agent for another.

I think the market is thin and if Murray's inclination is to not be motivated by a few extra million a year, he'll be reasonable.
For a team like Oakland or Jacksonville, signing Murray is a big splash regardless of whether it works out. They also have young, promising QBs that they want to protect in the passing game (Murray is a good pass blocker and outlet receiver) and protect with a credible running attack.
 

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,401
If we bring this guy back, I don't see how you can say anything has changed with this organization.

If you think you have to sign back everyone who got you to a good year, what's different?
I wouldn't be that harsh.

This isn't Jay Ratliff here who is getting paid more as a reward than for what he currently brings or they hope will bring to the table.

Is Murray likely to run for a franchise record again? No, but last year wasn't fluky. The guy is a very good player and while last year was certainly his best, he's put up good numbers every year that he's been here and he's always had a nice YPC.

If he was to be brought back, it wouldn't be like overpaying Ratliff or Miles Austin for what they'd done in the past or for a flash in the pan season. This guy is a good player who also happens to play a very pivotal role in this team's success. So while I do not want to give him a crazy contract, bringing him back even if at a high price would not be the same as what we've done in the past with other players.

This is different.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
I just can't see giving Murray the money he wants unless it's a Kaepernick style year to year deal with considerable salaries but not much guaranteed beyond the first year.
 

Chocolate Lab

Mere Commoner
Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
19,859
This is different.
I don't see why. If you want to have sustainable success, you have to be like the Patriots and repeatedly let good players go whose production you have confidence you can replace. We know running backs are the most replaceable assets in today's NFL, and we know history shows that near-400 carry mark (which Murray went way over) almost guarantees future injury and/or future drop in production. If you can't let this guy go, who can you let go?

And I really thought they intended to let him go all along, and that's why they ran him into the ground. But now it's looking like maybe that isn't the case.
 

shane

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,184
It's gotta be AP or a platoon at the running back position. AP will probably come cheap considering his unpleasantness in Minnesota which makes him so perfect. If we can't get him, bring in a veteran for cheap and draft a guy. No reason to spend a lot of cash at the running back position with such a great OL, especially with so little talent on defense.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
It's gotta be AP or a platoon at the running back position. AP will probably come cheap considering his unpleasantness in Minnesota which makes him so perfect. If we can't get him, bring in a veteran for cheap and draft a guy. No reason to spend a lot of cash at the running back position with such a great OL, especially with so little talent on defense.
What if Petersen doesn't get his reinstatement resolved until mid summer or later? Then you have passed on Murray and the draft to gamble that he will become available.
 
Last edited:

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
I think some RBs in the draft this year hurt themselves by not playing in the Senior Bowl. So many RBs looked good in that, more should have played.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,759
I don't see why. If you want to have sustainable success, you have to be like the Patriots and repeatedly let good players go whose production you have confidence you can replace. We know running backs are the most replaceable assets in today's NFL, and we know history shows that near-400 carry mark (which Murray went way over) almost guarantees future injury and/or future drop in production. If you can't let this guy go, who can you let go?

And I really thought they intended to let him go all along, and that's why they ran him into the ground. But now it's looking like maybe that isn't the case.
That is the Patriots. This is the Cowboys coming off of one good 12-4 season. Slightly different track record.

If this team believes that Randle is a solution, then as you said, nothing has changed. Phil Costa was supposed to be a solution too.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
The thing is we can never seem to find the right balance with RBs. We either went full on with a back, dating back to Emmitt and most recently with Murray...or just did not run enough. I see teams all over the league able to spread carries out and also work in niche backs like Sproles and Woodhead into the mix. Closest thing we had was with Felix and MBIII.
 

kidd

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
2,377
That is the Patriots. This is the Cowboys coming off of one good 12-4 season. Slightly different track record.

If this team believes that Randle is a solution, then as you said, nothing has changed. Phil Costa was supposed to be a solution too.
CL never said anything about plugging in Randle as a solution. He just doesn't think we should overpay Murray and I agree.

Does everyone here honestly want to give big time dollars to a guy with an injury history and who is likely to be injured again after having a 400+ carry season?
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
CL never said anything about plugging in Randle as a solution. He just doesn't think we should overpay Murray and I agree.

Does everyone here honestly want to give big time dollars to a guy with an injury history and who is likely to be injured again after having a 400+ carry season?
I think if you take the pulse of the board most people don't want to give big dollars to Murray. More so than bringing him back.
 

kidd

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
2,377
I think if you take the pulse of the board most people don't want to give big dollars to Murray. More so than bringing him back.
I have my doubts about his production even if we do bring him back at a reasonable price.

He had 400+ carries last year and has an injury history. Am I the only one who finds it ironic that his first healthy season came during a contract year? Plus you also have to factor in his fumbles.

I'm not really saying I don't want him back. I'm just saying I won't be brokenhearted if he walks.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
I have my doubts about his production even if we do bring him back at a reasonable price.

He had 400+ carries last year and has an injury history. Am I the only one who finds it ironic that his first healthy season came during a contract year? Plus you also have to factor in his fumbles.

I'm not really saying I don't want him back. I'm just saying I won't be brokenhearted if he walks.
There are plenty of red flags regarding Murray...I'd love to have the player back, but it would have to be financially acceptable.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,759
CL never said anything about plugging in Randle as a solution. He just doesn't think we should overpay Murray and I agree.

Does everyone here honestly want to give big time dollars to a guy with an injury history and who is likely to be injured again after having a 400+ carry season?
Nope. But it is a difficult situation. I don't want Randle as the guy. I don't want to go into the draft needing a RB either. It sucks honestly.
 

Chocolate Lab

Mere Commoner
Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
19,859
I really don't think they'd count on Randle as the lead guy. There has to be a reason they wouldn't give him more carries than they did. (I do think he could and should have gotten a lot more carries to keep the miles on Murray down, though.)

I think they probably spend like a second on a RB. Or go after some FA, preferably Peterson. I don't think they go total bargain basement or super expensive (unless it's Peterson, who might be worth it)... More a middle ground.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
What if Petersen doesn't get his reinstatement resolved until mid summer or later? Then you have passed on Murray and the draft to gamble that he will become available.
Jerry will know when Peterson will be available it will not be much of a gamble.
 
Top Bottom