Archer: Could Greg Hardy be a fit for the Cowboys?

Carl said:
If the thread is about Hardy there is no way he comes here. If it's about Murray I think he is gone. Too much depth in this draft. I would love to have him back, he is impressive but not irreplaceable
Click to expand...

Why do you think that? We have money to spend and our biggest need is for a stud pass rushing DE.
 
Simpleton said:
Why do you say that?

He's a 1 cut kind of guy, I think he'd be fine.
Click to expand...

A "1 cut kind of guy" is different from a back who is used to the zone scheme. Indiana used gap principles for the most part. And we need a back who can get the "dirty yards" that Garrett has referred to several times.

There are several other backs graded similarly I would take over him.
 
boozeman said:
A "1 cut kind of guy" is different from a back who is used to the zone scheme. Indiana used gap principles for the most part. And we need a back who can get the "dirty yards" that Garrett has referred to several times.

There are several other backs graded similarly I would take over him.
Click to expand...

Give me Todd Gurley, injury or no injury.
 
boozeman said:
An attack like that is built on rhythm and a back getting worked into the game.

If it isn't Murray, then they should devote high resources to his replacement....draft or free agency.
Click to expand...


Randle didn't seem to have much of a problem getting into a rhythm with so few carries...

I don't think anyone is suggesting a platoon but you bring up Seattle. I'd personally counter with the Jets who used every bit of a platoon system to build their running game. They were third in the NFL in rushing this past year and averaged a pretty healthy 4.5 yards per carry. Their team sucked but it had nothing to do with the rushing game.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Randle didn't seem to have much of a problem getting into a rhythm with so few carries...

I don't think anyone is suggesting a platoon but you bring up Seattle. I'd personally counter with the Jets who used every bit of a platoon system to build their running game. They were third in the NFL in rushing this past year and averaged a pretty healthy 4.5 yards per carry. Their team sucked but it had nothing to do with the rushing game.
Click to expand...

They could have been even better running the ball if they had a QB who could throw the football. OTOH, their running stats were bolstered by QB runs.
 
Clay_Allison said:
They could have been even better running the ball if they had a QB who could throw the football. OTOH, their running stats were bolstered by QB runs.
Click to expand...

I'd say that the combined states of Chris Ivory and Chris Johnson are pretty solid even though neither guy had over 1,000 yards rushing.

Just to be clear I still want Dallas to have a 1,200 - 1,400 yard rusher next year. I'm mostly concerned though about the YPC of our RBs carrying the ball and less concerned about having just one guy carry it every time.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I'd say that the combined states of Chris Ivory and Chris Johnson are pretty solid even though neither guy had over 1,000 yards rushing.

Just to be clear I still want Dallas to have a 1,200 - 1,400 yard rusher next year. I'm mostly concerned though about the YPC of our RBs carrying the ball and less concerned about having just one guy carry it every time.
Click to expand...

I think that Ryan Williams + a draft pick would be a very good combination, even if they got 200 carries each and the balance went to whoever didn't get cut between Randle/Dunbar.

I'd love for one guy to emerge and be the bell cow, but there are plenty of examples of platoons of backs carrying a team in the playoffs (Addai/Rhodes, Bradshaw/Jacobs).
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Randle didn't seem to have much of a problem getting into a rhythm with so few carries...

I don't think anyone is suggesting a platoon but you bring up Seattle. I'd personally counter with the Jets who used every bit of a platoon system to build their running game. They were third in the NFL in rushing this past year and averaged a pretty healthy 4.5 yards per carry. Their team sucked but it had nothing to do with the rushing game.
Click to expand...

The YPC does not tell the whole story. Nobody was going to go into a game with the Jets and fear them literally taking over the game.

That is the kind of offense we are building and a big reason we won 12 games.

There is no way I want to go backwards to a passing offense with Romo in his condition.

And if you choose that kind of offensive base, you would be stupid to entrust it to a platoon of schlubs. It is important, almost as important as the pass rush.

It will require Murray, a draft choice, etc...a real commitment of resources to do it right.
 
boozeman said:
The YPC does not tell the whole story. Nobody was going to go into a game with the Jets and fear them literally taking over the game.

That is the kind of offense we are building and a big reason we won 12 games.

There is no way I want to go backwards to a passing offense with Romo in his condition.

And if you choose that kind of offensive base, you would be stupid to entrust it to a platoon of schlubs. It is important, almost as important as the pass rush.

It will require Murray, a draft choice, etc...a real commitment of resources to do it right.
Click to expand...

I'm all for the draft choice option. Our picks are low and we need to take advantage of a talent being undervalued and dropping to us. RB fits that bill with teams preferring to pass on them in early rounds these days. Our second round pick should have one guy still on the board that can carry the mail.
 
Clay_Allison said:
I'm all for the draft choice option. Our picks are low and we need to take advantage of a talent being undervalued and dropping to us. RB fits that bill with teams preferring to pass on them in early rounds these days. Our second round pick should have one guy still on the board that can carry the mail.
Click to expand...

To be fair the reason RBs are falling is because there are a ton of them and they are easy to find. It's not so much that RBs are undervalued. They are just being correctly valued based on the large supply and small need for teams to fill the holes. Doesn't mean we shouldn't take a RB in the late second round. But getting a good starting RB in the late second round isn't really hitting a home run in the draft either. It's what you better do if you are picking one that highly.
 
boozeman said:
So does a "platoon" system when you have a team built on the running game.

Hard to name the last time that a team that wanted a running attack built it off of splitting the workload with a bunch of backs.

Seattle has not given Turbin or Michael more carries instead of Lynch the last two years. His carries have remained stable.

An attack like that is built on rhythm and a back getting worked into the game.

If it isn't Murray, then they should devote high resources to his replacement....draft or free agency.

Going with some asinine platoon, especially one involving any of the current backs on this roster, is a recipe for failure.
Click to expand...

First of all you don't "platoon" four backs. You feature two backs, and insert another for a change of pace while keeping the fourth inactive. This keeps you fresh all year and insulates you from injury.

Green Bay has two backs who have proven they can be productive with a full workload. They have two other backs and a fullback-- and this is a team that doesn't run as much as they should. If they did, they may have gone 17-2 or even undefeated.

Second, Seattle has been damned lucky Lynch has remained relatively healthy, having been active in all but one game in four full seasons and playoffs.

If he ever gets hurt their season could end. Flat out, just like ours would have if Murray went down. It's not like LeGarrett Blount gets released every week.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
To be fair the reason RBs are falling is because there are a ton of them and they are easy to find. It's not so much that RBs are undervalued. They are just being correctly valued based on the large supply and small need for teams to fill the holes. Doesn't mean we shouldn't take a RB in the late second round. But getting a good starting RB in the late second round isn't really hitting a home run in the draft either. It's what you better do if you are picking one that highly.
Click to expand...

I think it comes in large part from teams undervaluing the running game as a whole. Garrett's not the only pass-happy dork out there.
 
This guy scares me. In a way he reminds me of a more talented D. Underwood and not all there upstairs.
 
cowboydba said:
This guy scares me. In a way he reminds me of a more talented D. Underwood and not all there upstairs.
Click to expand...

Welcome...the name looks familiar, glad to have you back.

As for the player...I think we are at a point where we can take on a player like this.
 
Underwood was never anywhere near Hardy in terms of on field production though. Maybe from a perceived "talent" standpoint because he was a former 1st round pick but with Hardy you know you're getting a legitimate elite 270+ lb. pass rusher.
 
Simpleton said:
Underwood was never anywhere near Hardy in terms of on field production though. Maybe from a perceived "talent" standpoint because he was a former 1st round pick but with Hardy you know you're getting a legitimate elite 270+ lb. pass rusher.
Click to expand...

I would have no problem signing Hardy if he is Underwood crazy. I'll put up with Underwood crazy for 12-15 sacks out of a 270 lb DE.
 
ravidubey said:
It's a huge need, obviously, but you can't forget the gaping hole that is our running game. Without Murray's 1800+ yards and habit of stepping up big when the offense needed it most, Romo is nowhere near as effective and the defense is much, much worse on top of it.

You could add Reggie White in his prime and we'd probably lose more games with Joseph Randle starting in Murray's place.
Click to expand...

Murray's previous best prior to this season is was 1121 yards. This was his first season of playing every game since he was a sophomore (?) atOU. A contract year. Murray is my boy but these things do not add up well. I'd bet a lot of money he doesn't have another elite year like this and even more that he never plays in more than12 games in a season again. Let him walk. I could probably get 4 or 500 behind that line. Lol When's the last time a rb lived up to his 2nd contract? When he does walk I will be most interested in how he does behind an avg line again. I didn't even mention the fumbles or getting run down from behind as often as he does.
 
Cujo said:
Murray's previous best prior to this season is was 1121 yards. This was his first season of playing every game since he was a sophomore (?) atOU. A contract year. Murray is my boy but these things do not add up well. I'd bet a lot of money he doesn't have another elite year like this and even more that he never plays in more than12 games in a season again. Let him walk. I could probably get 4 or 500 behind that line. Lol When's the last time a rb lived up to his 2nd contract? When he does walk I will be most interested in how he does behind an avg line again. I didn't even mention the fumbles or getting run down from behind as often as he does.
Click to expand...
He probably won't have another year like last season. Those events are rare so if anyone thinks he or anyone else will do this production they aren't thinking straight. That being said. he could have a 1200 to 1400 yard season and that isnt anything to sneeze at.
 
L.T. Fan said:
He probably won't have another year like last season. Those events are rare so if anyone thinks he or anyone else will do this production they aren't thinking straight. That being said. he could have a 1200 to 1400 yard season and that isnt anything to sneeze at.
Click to expand...

In Dallas I agree, I think he could be a 1200-1400 yard back next season. What will be interesting though is if he leaves to go somewhere else. Can he be a 1400 yard back with say the Giants or someone else who can't seem to get a running game going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom