Machota: Stephen Jones - Cowboys are more committed than ever to running the ball

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,695
Stephen Jones: Cowboys are more committed than ever to running the ball

Jon Machota

Stephen Jones says the Cowboys had their eyes on running backs during the first three rounds of this year’s draft. But there were better players at other positions when they were on the clock.

The other part of the equation is that the Cowboys are comfortable with the group of running backs on their roster.

“We didn’t put the priority on taking a back that a lot of people may have thought that we might,” Jones, the team’s executive vice president, said during a Wednesday conference call with season-ticket holders. “We really feel like with Darren McFadden, Joseph Randle and Lance Dunbar that we have three really good running backs. At the same time, we’re not done. Player acquisitions are 365 days a year. We’ll continue to look to improve our football team.

“That doesn’t mean that we won’t be adding a back before we go to camp or during camp or even during the season. I know a team that won a Super Bowl this year, the New England Patriots, that added a back [LeGarrette Blount] at the very end of the season and helped lead them to a Super Bowl. You never know when the right guy is going to be there. We happen to think the right guy may be on our football team as we speak.”

While Jones didn’t mention Ryan Williams, who was on the Cowboys practice squad last year, he said it was not intentional and just an oversight. Jones said Williams needs to improve his pass blocking, but added “he’ll certainly be a factor in who’s going to be our running back this year.”

“His name actually came up quite a bit [during the draft],” Jones said. “Many times we were looking at backs later in the draft that we compared to Ryan and didn’t feel like they were as good as he was.”

Some would prefer that the Cowboys continue running with a bell cow back rather than change to a committee approach. But despite Murray winning the rushing title in 2014, Jones suggested the Cowboys “may end up being more efficient and more explosive by doing our running back by committee rather than putting so much pressure on one back.”

If the Cowboys are to eventually give the majority of carries to one player, McFadden could be the guy. After all, Jones compared him to Murray during the call because of the way both have dealt with multiple injuries.

“We really think Darren’s in the best shape of his career,” Jones said. “He looks great out there. We really think that you put him behind our offensive line and he has some luck and stays healthy, we might really have something here.”

Either way, Jones assured fans that the Cowboys will remain committed to the running game.

“We think it’s very important with this offensive line we have that it’s become really a part of what we’re about,” Jones said. “Part of our culture, part of our team toughness is to run the ball. Talking to Coach Garrett, talking to Coach Linehan, they’re more committed than ever, after watching the tape this year and really going back and reviewing the season, that running the football is a huge priority for us.”
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,453
Some would prefer that the Cowboys continue running with a bell cow back rather than change to a committee approach. But despite Murray winning the rushing title in 2014, Jones suggested the Cowboys “may end up being more efficient and more explosive by doing our running back by committee rather than putting so much pressure on one back.”
I don't know about RB by committee but I certainly wouldn't mind our leading back being more in the 250 carry ranges as opposed to the 400 carry range.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
I don't know about RB by committee but I certainly wouldn't mind our leading back being more in the 250 carry ranges as opposed to the 400 carry range.
I noted in conversation the other day that multi-back approaches have worked well in the playoffs (Joseph Addai and Dominic Rhodes for Indy comes to mind) and besides Emmitt Smith (the most durable running back of all time) top running backs historically have underperformed in the playoffs. Contrast the above example with the Chiefs, who faced Indy in those same playoffs. Larry Johnson was held to 32 yards rushing on 13 carries by the worst run defense in the NFL.

Murray was clearly worn down by the end of last season. Maybe a shared workload will have our backs looking fresher come the playoffs.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
I can understand the urge to compare with New England, but a better comparison is with our own football team from 2014. That team made a lot of big plays running the ball and they did it consistently.

Hard to see Linehan and Garrett sticking with the run if it only gains a yard or two.

And they need to, even if the attempts are repeatedly stuffed.
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,913
Hard to see Linehan and Garrett sticking with the run if it only gains a yard or two.

And they need to, even if the attempts are repeatedly stuffed.
We had numerous times last year when just that thing happened. And they stuck with it. The Rams game is a prime example.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,453
I can understand the urge to compare with New England, but a better comparison is with our own football team from 2014. That team made a lot of big plays running the ball and they did it consistently.

Hard to see Linehan and Garrett sticking with the run if it only gains a yard or two.
Why? We did all the time last year? I'm not sure why it's hard to believe that we will continue doing the same.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Why? We did all the time last year? I'm not sure why it's hard to believe that we will continue doing the same.
Of course the Cowboys will stick to the running game if for no other reason than to save face for not retaining Murray. They made a choice early on with McFadden and they will see it through rather than abandon the plan.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,453
Of course the Cowboys will stick to the running game if for no other reason than to save face for not retaining Murray. They made a choice early on with McFadden and they will see it through rather than abandon the plan.
I think the plan has always been invest in the O-line and the running game will come. It's why we had the best O-line in football last year and we still drafted 2 guys and are now pursuing Collins. Right or wrong the Cowboys clearly believe that the O-line is the engine to our running game and not the RB.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
I think the plan has always been invest in the O-line and the running game will come. It's why we had the best O-line in football last year and we still drafted 2 guys and are now pursuing Collins. Right or wrong the Cowboys clearly believe that the O-line is the engine to our running game and not the RB.
While thats true, the criticism comes from the refusal to draft another RB and go with McFadden. There is no face saving with having a good OL.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Of course the Cowboys will stick to the running game if for no other reason than to save face for not retaining Murray. They made a choice early on with McFadden and they will see it through rather than abandon the plan.
That's a very good point, best I've heard so far on why they'd be motivated to stick to the plan. If the team can't finish with 500 rushes for 2000 yards without Murray, it looks bad for not retaining him (worse if Murray remains healthy in Philly).
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,913
While thats true, the criticism comes from the refusal to draft another RB and go with McFadden. There is no face saving with having a good OL.
There was no refusal to draft a RB. No need for the dramatics. Stephen Jones even said they were looking at them in the first three rounds, but it just didn't fall for them. Other higher rated players were there at the time they were on the clock. It's arguable that was the case in the 3rd, since some don't like the selection of Green. But there is absolutely NO doubt in the first two rounds.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
There was no refusal to draft a RB. No need for the dramatics. Stephen Jones even said they were looking at them in the first three rounds, but it just didn't fall for them. Other higher rated players were there at the time they were on the clock. It's arguable that was the case in the 3rd, since some don't like the selection of Green. But there is absolutely NO doubt in the first two rounds.
What's dramatic. The organization opted to go with other positions rather than choose a RB at any point in the draft. Maybe saying opted not to sounds better than refused.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,453
There was no refusal to draft a RB. No need for the dramatics. Stephen Jones even said they were looking at them in the first three rounds, but it just didn't fall for them. Other higher rated players were there at the time they were on the clock. It's arguable that was the case in the 3rd, since some don't like the selection of Green. But there is absolutely NO doubt in the first two rounds.
Other then Ajayi I'm not sure there were any RB's worth a third round pick when our pick came up. The only thing we could have done was traded up in round 3 to get a RB. After that you have to start wondering if the RBs like Langford would have really been any better then Randle. It would have just been someone to kind of push and compete with Randle.
 

p1_

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
26,454
I'm buying it. Just sayin...
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I think the Thomas Jones example is a best case scenario with Mcfadden he was widely considered a bust when drafted and then went on to have a some very productive seasons.
 

dallen

Senior Tech
Joined
Jan 1, 2000
Messages
8,466
I noted in conversation the other day that multi-back approaches have worked well in the playoffs (Joseph Addai and Dominic Rhodes for Indy comes to mind) and besides Emmitt Smith (the most durable running back of all time) top running backs historically have underperformed in the playoffs. Contrast the above example with the Chiefs, who faced Indy in those same playoffs. Larry Johnson was held to 32 yards rushing on 13 carries by the worst run defense in the NFL.

Murray was clearly worn down by the end of last season. Maybe a shared workload will have our backs looking fresher come the playoffs.
I'm not sure if it still holds, but at the time Emmitt was the first rushing champion to ever win the Super Bowl
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I'm not sure if it still holds, but at the time Emmitt was the first rushing champion to ever win the Super Bowl
In the last 20 years Emmitt, Davis, and Jamal Lewis are the only backs to have a rushing title and a SB ring.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
In the same season. Walter Payton won the rushing title and the SB in different years. Pre-super bowl Jim Brown led the league in rushing and won the NFL championship in '64 but they played a shorter season then, so the wear and tear effect wasn't as big a deal. He only had 280 carries that year.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Shaun Alexander made it to the SB in 2005 with the rushing title, but he couldn't overcome the Steelers' MVP Bill Levy
 
Top Bottom