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

[Genghis Khan]

Everyone knows I was and am a Murray guy but I seem to recall a great deal of the folks on the board were of the impression that the OL was his claim to fame and made him what he was.

I never said that. I advocated bringing him or adequately replacing him. Unfortunately they did neither.

 

[L.T. Fan]

There's a very big difference between that and not functioning.

Okay. Comparatively speaking.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I never said that. I advocated bringing him or adequately replacing him. Unfortunately they did neither.

My position as well.

 

[townsend]

I think we've all been shocked at the step back the o line has taken. I still think our move away from vertical offense and power running is to blame. That was the team's identity, and it allowed us to beat defenses physically.

Frankly if I had one goal for our game against New England, it's that we give then a stiff, physical game, that bruises the crap out of them, win or lose.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

CRock is having a rough day today.

Get the fuck out of here. I'm not the one trying to argue that 3.9 ypc isn't actually 3.9 ypc.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I think we've all been shocked at the step back the o line has taken. I still think our move away from vertical offense and power running is to blame. That was the team's identity, and it allowed us to beat defenses physically.

No question about it, our RBs don't have the same blocking that we had last year.

For the people who think it was just Murray who made our O-line look great, then I would ask why Murray isn't making the shitty Eagles offensive line look great. A runningback can only be as good as the blocking in front of him and right now our blocking isn't very good.

 

[Genghis Khan]

No question about it, our RBs don't have the same blocking that we had last year.

For the people who think it was just Murray who made our O-line look great, then I would ask why Murray isn't making the shitty Eagles offensive line look great. A runningback can only be as good as the blocking in front of him and right now our blocking isn't very good.

Who said Murray made our line look great? No one. No one said that.

What there really is no question about is that our RBs have left a lot of yards on the field.

I don't think Murray is the same player this year so it's hard to draw conclusions about last year based on anything he's doing this season.

 

[townsend]

No question about it, our RBs don't have the same blocking that we had last year.

For the people who think it was just Murray who made our O-line look great, then I would ask why Murray isn't making the shitty Eagles offensive line look great. A runningback can only be as good as the blocking in front of him and right now our blocking isn't very good.

Murray's lack of production should come as a shock to no one. He's a back coming off a 400+ carry year, in an offense not suited for him, with a much inferior line.

Randle's failure is kind of a shock. I for one thought our line would let him give a Tatum Bell like performance. But he's an unreliable scat back who isn't even fit to lead a rbbc. Like I said earlier he's RB Ogletree, just interesting enough to let you forget he's terrible for a play. The fact is that YPC doesn't matter nearly as much as ratio of bad plays to good plays. Randle averages a good play one out of 7. That's atrocious, that's two wasted drives for every long home run.

Pretty much we need to see if C-Mike can run the ball 30 times on Sunday. If he's not our guy we'd either figure out a way to trade for Matt Forte, or just call it a season and see if we can make it 2-14 for a better draft.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Get the fuck out of here. I'm not the one trying to argue that 3.9 ypc isn't actually 3.9 ypc.

You're defending the 2015 version of troy hambrick, so yeah.

Look at the Atlanta game. Does 6+ ypc accurately reflect the game randle had overall? I'm you think it does, you simply don't know what you're looking at because over 80 percent of his runs were poor. If you think it doesn't, then you agree with how I'm looking at things overall.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Who said Murray made our line look great? No one. No one said that.

Plenty of people have, including experts on TV like Michael Irvin.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Murray's lack of production should come as a shock to no one. He's a back coming off a 400+ carry year, in an offense not suited for him, with a much inferior line.

Randle's failure is kind of a shock. I for one thought our line would let him give a Tatum Bell like performance. But he's an unreliable scat back who isn't even fit to lead a rbbc. Like I said earlier he's RB Ogletree, just interesting enough to let you forget he's terrible for a play. The fact is that YPC doesn't matter nearly as much as ratio of bad plays to good plays. Randle averages a good play one out of 7. That's atrocious, that's two wasted drives for every long home run.

Pretty much we need to see if C-Mike can run the ball 30 times on Sunday. If he's not our guy we'd either figure out a way to trade for Matt Forte, or just call it a season and see if we can make it 2-14 for a better draft.

Randle's failure is only a shock if you were duped by his 6ypc last year. If you looked deeper like I'm advocating now, you could see it coming.

I agree completely with everything else you're saying here.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Plenty of people have, including experts on TV like Michael Irvin.

I'm talking about on here, since you posed your question to the people on here.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Look at the Atlanta game. Does 6+ ypc accurately reflect the game randle had overall? I'm you think it does, you simply don't know what you're looking at because over 80 percent of his runs were poor. If you think it doesn't, then you agree with how I'm looking at things overall.

See this is how crazy some of the stats manipulation is. Here is a breakdown of Randle's runs. I bolded the bad runs. Meaning runs for 1 yard that result in a TD are not bad runs. Basically anything else under 4 yards I put down as a bad run. So tell me how 80% of his runs were poor? Other then clearly the defense had adjusted in the second half (AKA the crazy amount of penetration leading to negative runs).

28 yards
37 yards TD
1 yards TD
20 yards
1 yard
-1 yard
1 yard TD
4 yards
1 yard
0 yard
-1 yard
-4 yards
2 yards
-2 yards

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I'm talking about on here, since you posed your question to the people on here.

People have said it on here. It's the same people that thought we would be a disaster at RB without Murray. If that wasn't you, that's fine. Or if it was you and now you want to claim you didn't say it, that is fine too. I didn't quote you, so you can ignore it if it doesn't apply to you.

 

[NoDak]

Everyone knows I was and am a Murray guy but I seem to recall a great deal of the folks on the board were of the impression that the OL was his claim to fame and made him what he was.

I don't think that's quite true. A lot of people were and still are giving credit to Murray for his year last year. But the part you're leaving out and the part you were arguing against is that the main reason people didn't want him back. The money he wanted yes, but the main reason was because of the drop off history has proven time and again that was coming for a RB that had as many touches as he did.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I don't think that's quite true. A lot of people were and still are giving credit to Murray for his year last year. But the part you're leaving out and the part you were arguing against is that the main reason people didn't want him back. The money he wanted yes, but the main reason was because of the drop off history has proven time and again that was coming for a RB that had as many touches as he did.

They were the second half of the season but the first half it wasn't that way.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Randle against the Eagles for example only went for under 3 yards on 6 out of 18 carries or so. So 33% led to what one could consider a failure of a run.

Murray against the Eagles for example went for under 3 yards against the eagles on 17 of 31 carries for example (Second Eagles game). So over half of his carries against the same defense with the same QB went for shit.

So when someone says that Randle doesn't get positive yards on enough carries the way Murray did I wonder how well they remember all of the games Murray played.

 

[Carp]

Get the fuck out of here. I'm not the one trying to argue that 3.9 ypc isn't actually 3.9 ypc.

Take that shit in the courtroom.

 

[Jiggyfly]

Randle against the Eagles for example only went for under 3 yards on 6 out of 18 carries or so. So 33% led to what one could consider a failure of a run.

Murray against the Eagles for example went for under 3 yards against the eagles on 17 of 31 carries for example (Second Eagles game). So over half of his carries against the same defense with the same QB went for shit.

So when someone says that Randle doesn't get positive yards on enough carries the way Murray did I wonder how well they remember all of the games Murray played.

I said people were forgetting how much Murray was getting minimal yards on a lot of carries last year and them popping a big one or two.

But they want to stay with the myth that he was getting 4 and 5 yards every carry.

Where are you getting these stats from because I want to crunch some numbers as well.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I said people were forgetting how much Murray was getting minimal yards on a lot of carries last year and them popping a big one or two.

But they want to stay with the myth that he was getting 4 and 5 yards every carry.

Where are you getting these stats from because I want to crunch some numbers as well.

Just went to ESPN and went through the play by play on the games.