Week 4 Gameday Chatter Thread | Cowboys at Saints |10/04/2015

Cowboysrock55 said:

That's true for all RBs.

Click to expand...

Ok then, fine. Those other RBs are also producing a lot of 4,5,6,7,8, and 9 yard carries to balance them out.

Are ours? Or are those negative to 3 yarders more along the norm?

NoDak said:

Exaggeration aside, our RBs have a shitload more runs for negative, 0, 1, or 2 yards than they do for ten plus. It's not too hard to figure out which side of the coin the outlier is. Unless you're pushing some silly agenda, that is.

Click to expand...

Exactly right. It's honestly very surprising to me that there are people who will excuse and defend a clearly inferior and nothing player like Randle.

NoDak said:

Ok then, fine. Those other RBs are also producing a lot of 4,5,6,7,8, and 9 yard carries to balance them out.

Are ours? Or are those negative to 3 yarders more along the norm?

Click to expand...

Exactly. And that's the point.

Carp said:

For the record...I bought into Randle being able to be a primary runner and be effective. I liked what I saw and counted on the growth of our line, plus the addition of Collins. I liked the philosophy that no one was above the system, with an emphasis on the OL. Well, clearly Randle is not cut out to be a lead back, even a lead back of a RBBC. I am gaining respect for McFadden every game, but he is on the downside of his career. I still believe in the philosophy, we just have to do a better job at RB.

Click to expand...

I agree. Part of me thinks that this points to just how good Murray was, but then I see how poor he looks this year and I start to think our run game would be just as ineffective with him at a much higher price.

And the Atlanta game is the perfect case in point. 3 carries for 86 yards, plus 11 carries for 1 total yard.

He "averaged" over 6 yards per carry for the day overall. But which grouping of stats gives you a better representation of his performance? Over 80 of his carries went for essentially nothing. Suddenly that 6 ypc is extremely misleading.

This isn't rocket science people.

Deuce said:

I agree. Part of me thinks that this points to just how good Murray was, but then I see how poor he looks this year and I start to think our run game would be just as ineffective with him at a much higher price.

Click to expand...

Also factor in an obvious dropoff in the OL production. The real culprit however to the Dallas running game occurs in the second half when opponents no longer fear a long ball passing threat.

NoDak said:

Ok then, fine. Those other RBs are also producing a lot of 4,5,6,7,8, and 9 yard carries to balance them out.

Are ours? Or are those negative to 3 yarders more along the norm?

Click to expand...

I honestly have no idea what percentage of runs go for 4 or 5 yards for most backs. I know that all RBs tend to have long runs. I know that all RBs tend to get stopped for nothing. I know supposedly great RBs like Lynch and Murray can barely even average 3 YPC this year. So this claim that elite backs are consistently getting 4 or 5 yards is silly. They all get stopped for minimal gains and they all break long ones.

If I'm looking at Randle, he is exactly what he is. Averaging 3.9 YPC right now which isn't good enough. That's partially on him and it's partially on his teammates. I just think it's funny that people think the solution to our run game is to plug in a better RB. Our blocking sucks compared to last year and we have zero threat in the passing game. Of course the running game is going to suffer. Fix those two things and our running game will get a lot better.

The thing is, I can see we need to do better in the running game without cherry picking statistics.

Genghis Khan said:

And the Atlanta game is the perfect case in point. 3 carries for 86 yards, plus 11 carries for 1 total yard.

He "averaged" over 6 yards per carry for the day overall. But which grouping of stats gives you a better representation of his performance? Over 80 of his carries went for essentially nothing. Suddenly that 6 ypc is extremely misleading.

This isn't rocket science people.

Click to expand...

So you're saying Randle is a home run hitting RB? Meaning you must be of the opinion that he breaks more long runs then most RBs?

Cowboysrock55 said:

So you're saying Randle is a home run hitting RB? Meaning you must be of the opinion that he breaks more long runs then most RBs?

Click to expand...

C-rock, you probably need to ride this one out. No one here, yourself included, believes Randle is a home-run hitting running back.

He's OK.

I think we all believe we need an upgrade.

Cowboysrock55 said:

So you're saying Randle is a home run hitting RB? Meaning you must be of the opinion that he breaks more long runs then most RBs?

Click to expand...

Wow. Even Jiggy is impressed with how you pulled that one out of thin air.

Cowboysrock55 said:

It's arbitrary though. One day we take out the longest run. The next we take out the 3 longest runs. Any time you start to manipulate numbers in an arbitrary fashion like that it renders the point useless. Especially when you have no point of comparison. So you take away out longest run, then every running game you compare it to you have to take away their longest run too. Same if you want to take 3 long runs away.

Is our running game especially talented at creating big plays? That's the argument people seem to be making but I have no point of comparison for it.

Click to expand...

In that case look at how often our running plays get stopped for little or no gain even late in football games when the run should pay dividends. We all agree getting stopped for no gain or a yard or two is bad. So if it's happening a lot... you see where I'm going with that.

ravidubey said:

C-rock, you probably need to ride this one out. No one here, yourself included, believes Randle is a home-run hitting running back.

Click to expand...

Well if he isn't a home run hitting RB, why are we talking about him like all he does is go for long runs, or gets zero yards? Isn't that the definition of a home run threat?

It's comparable to bad QB play. If Weeden throws a long bomb in the first half, it doesn't make up for a bunch of drive killing incompletions later on. Or if a WR drops a bunch of passes, that one big play doesn't change the fact that he's a liability.

NoDak said:

Wow. Even Jiggy is impressed with how you pulled that one out of thin air.

Click to expand...

It was a question, not a statement.

Essentially Randle is Ogletree.

Genghis Khan said:

Exactly right. It's honestly very surprising to me that there are people who will excuse and defend a clearly inferior and nothing player like Randle.

Click to expand...

Nobody is defending him it's pointing out the lengths people are going to make a point.

And by the way this was about Dunbar's run and the overall run game you are the one with Randle on the brain.

Clay_Allison said:

In that case look at how often our running plays get stopped for little or no gain even late in football games when the run should pay dividends. We all agree getting stopped for no gain or a yard or two is bad. So if it's happening a lot... you see where I'm going with that.

Click to expand...

It's far simpler then that. Randle averages 3.9 ypc which is unacceptable. But the runs stopped in the backfield aren't really all his fault either. There are a ton of runs where the blocking just isn't good and we have defenders in the backfield. To me at least it's pretty obvious that if Murray had the runs that Randle has this year that he wouldn't be nearly as productive as he was last season. It's plain as day to see our run blocking up front just isn't as good. It's also pretty obvious that teams have no respect for our passing game.

Cowboysrock55 said:

It was a question, not a statement.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. Doesn't make it any less moronic.

Cowboysrock55 said:

Well if he isn't a home run hitting RB, why are we talking about him like all he does is go for long runs, or gets zero yards? Isn't that the definition of a home run threat?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that's the definition. Adrian Peterson is a home run threat. He's capable of breaking an 80 yarder at any time, while also hammering away at a defense picking up decent yardage. If he doesn't break a long one, he still has a good day the vast majority of the time. So far this year if Randle doesn't break a big one, you end up with the 11 carries, 20 yard kind of days.

Cowboysrock55 said:

Well if he isn't a home run hitting RB, why are we talking about him like all he does is go for long runs, or gets zero yards? Isn't that the definition of a home run threat?

Click to expand...

I've said this since forever. He has energy early on, breaks one run, and then is done. Gets figured out, loses energy, whatever.

That's a weak-assed player, not a home run threat. The kid, for all his "home runs" has yet to hit 100 yards. Even by accident. He's averaging 3.9 YPC and dear God I don't even want to know what he's averaging outside his decent run or two each game.

Wish you didn't feel you had to latch onto the guy. Let it go.