Cowboys discussed trade with Browns.

1bigfan13 said:
Pretty much. But, you know... wave your pom-poms and act pretentious and all that.
Click to expand...

It's fucking annoying as hell. Cowboys Rool! Haters Drool!
 
jsmith6919 said:
Off the top of my head I'd take Cobb, Jones, or Langford and we could have moved up a couple and got Coleman, Duke Johnson, or David Johnson
Click to expand...

Absolutely. These are all backs I was interested in.
 
jsmith6919 said:
Off the top of my head I'd take Cobb, Jones, or Langford and we could have moved up a couple and got Coleman, Duke Johnson, or David Johnson
Click to expand...

Just because you would take them does not make them better especially considering Dunbar knows the offense and plays all special teams.
 
Jiggyfly said:
Just because you would take them does not make them better especially considering Dunbar knows the offense and plays all special teams.
Click to expand...

I could understand you putting up Randle or even DMac but are you really saying coaches pet Dunbar is better than any of them :lol
 
jsmith6919 said:
I could understand you putting up Randle or even DMac but are you really saying coaches pet Dunbar is better than any of them :lol
Click to expand...

The bigger problem is that a nobody like Dunbar has been permitted to write his own scholarship to the team simply by ingratiating himself to a bad special teams coach. I don't even think the offensive coaches are as enamored with him as they lead on.
 
boozeman said:
The bigger problem is that a nobody like Dunbar has been permitted to write his own scholarship to the team simply by ingratiating himself to a bad special teams coach. I don't even think the offensive coaches are as enamored with him as they lead on.
Click to expand...

Well then the ST's coach has way too much power if his pet is affecting the roster especially at rb on a supposed running team
 
1bigfan13 said:
History has shown that there will be some productive backs out of the draft class in rounds 3-7. It's way too early to just assume that the Cowboys couldn't have done better.

Especially when you consider that we already had 7 years of tape on McFadden's worthless ass and 3 years of Dunbar.

I'd bet a months pay that a RB drafted between rounds 3-6 will be better than McFadden and Dunbar.
Click to expand...

Maybe you'd have found a RB better than Dunbar in the 3rd-7th but I wouldn't have wanted to sacrifice Damien Wilson or Ryan Russell to get a Lance Dunbar replacement. I'm looking for a lead back, not another guy who will get stuck behind Randle and McFadden.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but it looks like we might have gotten some good players in this draft. The only way we find a sure-fire upgrade is probably by not selecting Gregory in the 2nd, and I'm not going to make that trade-off.

I think the ONLY pick you can really say that might have been a mistake instead of locking in on Best Available Running Back was Chaz Green -- but at the time we didn't know we'd be landing Collins either.

Hard for me to say they "ignored RB all offseason" when they added the only FA they could really afford (given Dez's situation at the time), and maybe missed on ONE draft slot where they could have gotten an instant contributor.

The opportunities were not really all over the place. The few opportunities they had, I think they did better by NOT taking a RB.
 
mschmidt64 said:
I notice you don't hear Jay Ajayi's name anymore.
Click to expand...

He's got work to do as a blocker, but he flashed his talent and now has a cracked rib. Yeah, I'd take him over Dunbar. Hell, I would take a lot of backs over Dunbar.
 
boozeman said:
He's got work to do as a blocker, but he flashed his talent and now has a cracked rib. Yeah, I'd take him over Dunbar. Hell, I would take a lot of backs over Dunbar.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is debating that we have no use for Dunbar.
 
I think coaches are putting way too much faith in our OL to create holes for our marginal RBs. The fan base as well. Several people just assume we'll be fine because of the OL talent.

As I've said several times, I think we're going to struggle running the ball in short yardage situations. The run game won't be as consistent as it was last year.

Think about this. The early 90s Cowboys OL is considered one top 2 or 3 OLs of All-Time. Yet when RBs other than Emmitt carried the ball they couldn't even scratch out 4 ypc.

That's because despite what some may think, in order to have a consistent and effective running game you need talent at the RB position; even with a strong OL. This notion that the Cowboys will be fine with a backfield full of bums is silly.
 
1bigfan13 said:
I think coaches are putting way too much faith in our OL to create holes for our marginal RBs. The fan base as well. Several people just assume we'll be fine because of the OL talent.

As I've said several times, I think we're going to struggle running the ball in short yardage situations. The run game won't be as consistent as it was last year.

Think about this. The early 90s Cowboys OL is considered one top 2 or 3 OLs of All-Time. Yet when RBs other than Emmitt carried the ball they couldn't even scratch out 4 ypc.

That's because despite what some may think, in order to have a consistent and effective running game you need talent at the RB position; even with a strong OL. This notion that the Cowboys will be fine with a backfield full of bums is silly.
Click to expand...

Sherman Williams averaged 4.3 in 1995. :unsure
 
1bigfan13 said:
I think coaches are putting way too much faith in our OL to create holes for our marginal RBs. The fan base as well. Several people just assume we'll be fine because of the OL talent.

As I've said several times, I think we're going to struggle running the ball in short yardage situations. The run game won't be as consistent as it was last year.

Think about this. The early 90s Cowboys OL is considered one top 2 or 3 OLs of All-Time. Yet when RBs other than Emmitt carried the ball they couldn't even scratch out 4 ypc.

That's because despite what some may think, in order to have a consistent and effective running game you need talent at the RB position; even with a strong OL. This notion that the Cowboys will be fine with a backfield full of bums is silly.
Click to expand...

Chicken dinner.
 
1bigfan13 said:
I think coaches are putting way too much faith in our OL to create holes for our marginal RBs. The fan base as well. Several people just assume we'll be fine because of the OL talent.

As I've said several times, I think we're going to struggle running the ball in short yardage situations. The run game won't be as consistent as it was last year.

Think about this. The early 90s Cowboys OL is considered one top 2 or 3 OLs of All-Time. Yet when RBs other than Emmitt carried the ball they couldn't even scratch out 4 ypc.

That's because despite what some may think, in order to have a consistent and effective running game you need talent at the RB position; even with a strong OL. This notion that the Cowboys will be fine with a backfield full of bums is silly.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better. That OL needed Emmitt.

But I will say the offense will remain dangerous as long as it commits to running the football, even with scrubs.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Sherman Williams averaged 4.3 in 1995. :unsure
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But that was one year out of our dominant OL era.

1991 - 1994 every back other than Emmitt avg'd less than 4 ypc.

Safe to say 1995 was an anomaly.
 
jsmith6919 said:
I could understand you putting up Randle or even DMac but are you really saying coaches pet Dunbar is better than any of them :lol
Click to expand...

Did you miss the part about special teams play?

I am no fan of Dunbar but I also realize he is more than just a RB on this team and has to be replaced with a guy who can play ST the way this team is set up.
 
mschmidt64 said:
Maybe you'd have found a RB better than Dunbar in the 3rd-7th but I wouldn't have wanted to sacrifice Damien Wilson or Ryan Russell to get a Lance Dunbar replacement. I'm looking for a lead back, not another guy who will get stuck behind Randle and McFadden.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but it looks like we might have gotten some good players in this draft. The only way we find a sure-fire upgrade is probably by not selecting Gregory in the 2nd, and I'm not going to make that trade-off.

I think the ONLY pick you can really say that might have been a mistake instead of locking in on Best Available Running Back was Chaz Green -- but at the time we didn't know we'd be landing Collins either.

Hard for me to say they "ignored RB all offseason" when they added the only FA they could really afford (given Dez's situation at the time), and maybe missed on ONE draft slot where they could have gotten an instant contributor.

The opportunities were not really all over the place. The few opportunities they had, I think they did better by NOT taking a RB.
Click to expand...

This.
 
1bigfan13 said:
I think coaches are putting way too much faith in our OL to create holes for our marginal RBs. The fan base as well. Several people just assume we'll be fine because of the OL talent.

As I've said several times, I think we're going to struggle running the ball in short yardage situations. The run game won't be as consistent as it was last year.

Think about this. The early 90s Cowboys OL is considered one top 2 or 3 OLs of All-Time. Yet when RBs other than Emmitt carried the ball they couldn't even scratch out 4 ypc.

That's because despite what some may think, in order to have a consistent and effective running game you need talent at the RB position; even with a strong OL. This notion that the Cowboys will be fine with a backfield full of bums is silly.
Click to expand...

I think we have talent at RB, you happen to think otherwise.

This argument that we are fine with a backfield full of bums is one nobody is making.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom