Archer - Jason Witten: 'Silly' to think anybody can do what Murray did

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
121,745
Jason Witten: 'Silly' to think anybody can do what Murray did

January, 22, 2015


By Todd Archer | ESPNDallas.com

PHOENIX -- There is a theory going around about the Dallas Cowboys and their running game that sounded a lot like the theory around the team in the 1990s: You can get just about any running back to have success behind that offensive line.


Emmitt Smith became the NFL’s all-time leading rusher with help from an offensive line that had too many Pro Bowlers to count. DeMarco Murray led the NFL in rushing in 2014 with 1,845 yards, breaking Smith’s franchise record for yards in a season, with three Pro Bowlers blocking for him.

Jason Witten does not subscribe to that theory. At all.

“We’ve got good running backs,” he said. “Joe Randle took advantage of every opportunity he got. I think [Lance] Dunbar’s got a great future ahead of him. Obviously the O-line, but I think it would be silly to not give him the credit for what he did. It’s not easy to do that and I think Coach [Jason] Garrett said it a few weeks back that he created a mindset for our team and that’s not easy to do. He deserves a lot of that credit, DeMarco does, and so that’s why you want a guy like that back because he stands for everything you want in your football team.”

But the financials will play a part in Murray’s future. The Cowboys can afford to pay him whatever they want. It will be a question of if they want to pay him big money before the free-agent market opens.

Witten will do everything he can to make sure Murray stays. The two developed a tighter relationship in 2014 as workout partners in the offseason.

“You don’t invest that time just for one year,” Witten said. “You’re really thinking big picture. But he deserves it. He’s worked hard. He has a lot of good things around him and he’s the first to give others credit. You want him to have as much success as he can, but of course you want him on your team. … You want to see him maximize that but there’s no question that I hope he’s thinking about guys like me when he’s going through that decision. Not that he owes us anything because he doesn’t, but that he wants to be a part of that. But you know it’s a business, too.”
 

Jwooten15

Brand New Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
142
Murray isn't going to take a team-friendly deal. He's going to chase the money. That's somewhat understandable.

No one back will do what Murray did last year, but bringing in AP and having Ryan Williams, Randle, or a mid-round draft pick behind him will give us the same level of production.

Bottom line is Murray can take $4mil/year with us and like it, or he can take his fumbling ass to Jacksonville or someone else who's willing to overpay.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
I think 4 mil is too low...he deserves 5-6 mil a year here. Would he take a 4 year 20 mil deal? Probably not, but I do think he deserves more than 4 mil.
 

Jwooten15

Brand New Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
142
I'd usually agree this his level of production would normally demand more than $4mill, but he was overworked this season, and it's nearly a certainty there will be a dropoff next year.

I know it's the cliche going around, but I really feel there are quality backs out there who can perform just fine in this offense (and take way less money than Murray).

I just think it's ironic that he played through injury and showed up like he did during a contract year.

Not that I really question his desire, but it does raise a couple questions. I'd much rather take AP or Ingram for 2 years at a lower price tag.
 
Last edited:

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
I'd usually agree this his level of production would normally demand more than $4mill, but he was overworked this season, and it's nearly a certainty there will be a dropoff next year.

I know it's the cliche going around, but I really feel there are quality backs out there who can perform just fine in this offense (and take way less money than Murray).

I just think it's ironic that he played through injury and showed up like he did during a contract year.

Not that I really question his desire, but it does raise a couple questions. I'd much rather take AP or Ingram for 2 years at a lower price tag.
I am kind of in between on this one...I think he deserves the money, but understand we just may not be able to pay him. No doubt he was overworked this year and we should expect lesser results next year, but I think we also have to be smarter in how many carries we give him if he comes back. He averaged about 28 touches a game, I think we get that down to 22 or so and you have a more explosive player.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
As an aside...I don't get the love for Ingram. If we are doing short term deals for a RB I'd take Gore over him...and of course Peterson.
 

Jwooten15

Brand New Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
142
As an aside...I don't get the love for Ingram. If we are doing short term deals for a RB I'd take Gore over him...and of course Peterson.
Agree with you there. Gore has about the same window for production as Romo does. So I'd take him over Ingram as well. And that might actually be a possibility.
 

dallen

Senior Tech
Joined
Jan 1, 2000
Messages
8,466
Running backs that have 400 carries in a season - 95% of the time they have a horrible followup the next year. And that is just your average back. Murray's durability has been anything but average. Then you throw on top of that the ball control issues. I don't mind bringing him back if he is cheap, but we can't count on him to have any where the type of production he had this season
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
Murray will cost too much to keep.

And I agree with Witten and JWooten that no single player can be expected to produce like that in 2015, Murray included. It was a career year by all accounts, but that is the kind of production Dallas needs from the position.

This is a run-first offense that must be led by an elite running back and very solid help. We had the elite back last year but very average support. No way Murray should have had to carry the ball that much. It bordered on abuse, to tell the truth.

A high draft pick and a solid free agent are what the team needs and let Williams, Randle, Dunbar, and whoever else fight for the remaining two slots. I say keep 4 RBs and 1 FB. It makes more sense given the style of offense .
 

Texas Ace

Teh Acester
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,400
As an aside...I don't get the love for Ingram. If we are doing short term deals for a RB I'd take Gore over him...and of course Peterson.
Me either.

Not only do I think he's nothing special, but he also strikes me as a soft player.

This is a tough minded team with scrappy guys all over, and it took a lot of changes to make it this way. So I don't wanna add a soft guy especially at a position that we're going to be relying a lot on.

Gore is up there in age and that would be a concern of mine, but I'd rather have him than Ingram or a guy like Moreno.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
Me either.

Not only do I think he's nothing special, but he also strikes me as a soft player.

This is a tough minded team with scrappy guys all over, and it took a lot of changes to make it this way. So I don't wanna add a soft guy especially at a position that we're going to be relying a lot on.

Gore is up there in age and that would be a concern of mine, but I'd rather have him than Ingram or a guy like Moreno.
The thing about Ingram is that he very rarely busts a big run. Something like a 30 yarder is his career long. Gore is not a HR hitter anymore, but he still rips off a few a year.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
Gore, Peterson, Ingram-- HUGE steps back for our running game. Too maintain the level of production the passing game has to step up.

Peterson might even be done, and even if he's not he can't take the bulk of carries for 16 games. He's faded after his first carry of the season even before being suspended.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Gore, Peterson, Ingram-- HUGE steps back for our running game. Too maintain the level of production the passing game has to step up.

Peterson might even be done, and even if he's not he can't take the bulk of carries for 16 games. He's faded after his first carry of the season even before being suspended.
No matter what Petersen has accomplished he is a high mileage gamble at any price. He has had the equivelent of 6 or 7 times the wear on him than what Murray racked last year.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
I'm sorry, Adrian Peterson is not a huge step back at all. Gore is slightly, but he would be a part of a rotation.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
No matter what Petersen has accomplished he is a high mileage gamble at any price. He has had the equivelent of 6 or 7 times the wear on him than what Murray racked last year.
He has the benefit of basically a year off...which you gloss over every time this discussion comes up.

Also...not sure how Murray having basically half the overall carries career wise that Peterson does somehow comes out to 6 or 7 times more wear and tear. Fuzzy math to push an agenda.
 

ravidubey

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
20,162
I'm sorry, Adrian Peterson is not a huge step back at all. Gore is slightly, but he would be a part of a rotation.
The old AP would be a monster upgrade. The guy I saw struggle through most of week 1 (after his awesome TD run) is no longer a feature back.
 

Carp

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
15,127
The old AP would be a monster upgrade. The guy I saw struggle through most of week 1 (after his awesome TD run) is no longer a feature back.
Good grief...he played in 1 game and it is labeled a struggle? A game they won 34-6.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Good grief...he played in 1 game and it is labeled a struggle? A game they won 34-6.
You park a high mileage car for a year, when you come back It's still a high mileage car and one year older.
 
Top Bottom