The Running Back position will doom us or not thread...

ravidubey said:
Man, pile on Clay.

What have I said that's implausible?

That NY will have have an average OL instead of a terrible one?

That a strong rookie prospect in a strong class with greater pedigree than any Cowboy RB has more potential than anyone Dallas has?

That Vereen and Jennings will be average?

That the worst three backs of all the above look to be McFadden, Dunbar, and Ryan Williams?

I think it really comes down to Randle. People seem to believe he's this 1200+ yard back.

Unfortunately they *have* to believe that.

FYI, ">=" translated means about the same or better.
Click to expand...
You're saying (3.3 ypc) Andre Williams is going to be some kind of secret badass and the other two are going to be "solid" (not sure how many yards are in a 'solid') while each and every one of our backs is going to fall flat. I'll take our Williams over theirs. I'll take Randle over any of them.

I get that you think the Giants don't need to be a run first offense so maybe rushing for 1500 yards as a team would be solid enough for them. So, maybe you see their backs as better solely by virtue of having to clear a lower bar to be "successful".

I disagree. Their QB is a big old dude and he's not as fragile as Romo but if they could get away with being a pass first offense with no committment to the run they'd be winning more games.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
That's on the coaches and there is no reason to believe they will regress with regards to this.
Click to expand...

I was highly concerned they would until they got Collins and doubled down on the line. We made a running back committee work in 2003, 2007 and 2009. I think the front office believe that they can do it again and there will be pressure on the coaches to make the team's newfound identity as a team that runs first and protects the D carry over into this year. They don't want to look like fools for letting Murray go to the Eagles.
 
boozeman said:
Romo with a run game is top shelf, not a bus driver. It is not a coincidence he had fewer back breaking turnovers. He didn't feel the pressure to win games by himself. He seemed much more in control and efficient.

And it wasn't because the pass protection was that much better, he was not sacked less than par.
Click to expand...

It was at the very least partially because the pass protection was better.
 
Jiggyfly said:
What does that have to do with anything I said?
Click to expand...

For rookies, Smith and Fred had outstanding rookie seasons. Nitpicking it down to one game is disingenuous.
 
Jiggyfly said:
Good rookies not great Poe ate Fredericks lunch and Smith had his struggles as well.
Click to expand...

Don't try to rationalize with them. They have no room for contingencies. The run game for the upcoming season is very much an unknown now because of the loss of a producing RB. It is in fact a wait an see situation with both the rookie and the next RB. It's not rocket science.
 
Clay_Allison said:
You're saying (3.3 ypc) Andre Williams is going to be some kind of secret badass and the other two are going to be "solid" (not sure how many yards are in a 'solid') while each and every one of our backs is going to fall flat. I'll take our Williams over theirs. I'll take Randle over any of them.
Click to expand...

Randle over Andre Williams without seeing Williams or Randle play as an 20-carry NFL starter is what we call homerism. You also can't take Randle over Jennings either. Averaging 3.8 yards per carry behind that terrible crippled 2014 Giants OL was an accomplishment. The year before he averaged 4.5 YPC behind the Raiders' OL, and that's more like the player he is.

I don't know he will be better, but Williams has a stronger pedigree than Randle. He also proved in college he can handle lots of carries behind an average line which is what the Giants will need.

BTW, Williams doesn't have to be some secret badass to be better than our backs.

Our backs suck. We really need to understand this now.

They are either the worst in the conference or tied for the worst in the conference with NY.

Contenders like Green Bay, Seattle, Detroit, New Orleans, Arizona, San Fran, and Carolina (sheesh, with a healthy Stewart even they are better) all have better running backs. Yes, I'd trade all of our shitbags for David Johnson right now. Philly, Washington, Minnesota, Atlanta, St Louis, and Chicago are also better. God, even Tampa Bay has Doug Martin.

We are a run first team! Without a running back!! I can't believe fricking pass-happy Green Bay has two backs better than any of ours. We are tied with the fing Giants for last in the whole conference in RB quality.

I won't compare with the AFC too, because I might cry.

I envy those who have deluded themselves into thinking Randle is some kind of 1400+ yard back. You guys and Jerry.
 
Last edited:
Clay_Allison said:
I was highly concerned they would until they got Collins and doubled down on the line. We made a running back committee work in 2003, 2007 and 2009. I think the front office believe that they can do it again and there will be pressure on the coaches to make the team's newfound identity as a team that runs first and protects the D carry over into this year. They don't want to look like fools for letting Murray go to the Eagles.
Click to expand...

2003 Dallas had Parcells who knew his shit and was never infatuated with being known as some kind of offensive guru.

In 07 they had 2nd and 4th round picks each playing well behind a strong line and strong overall team.

In 09 they had that draw play that inflated our stats between the 20's and was utterly useless in the redzone. They also added a 1st round pick in Felix the previous year, but even then the running game was mostly a mirage, and the Vikings proved it in the playoffs.

Today they have half the tools to make a running game work. The other half is always the running backs, and they are among the very worst in the league at this position.
 
mschmidt64 said:
It was at the very least partially because the pass protection was better.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd say since the O-line added an all pro at guard, I'd say it probably had a little something to do with Romo's improvement. What ever happened to you guys preaching about the O-line and D-line being the most important thing. Now it's suddenly all about the RB.
 
ravidubey said:
2003 Dallas had Parcells who knew his shit and was never infatuated with being known as some kind of offensive guru.

In 07 they had 2nd and 4th round picks each playing well behind a strong line and strong overall team.

In 09 they had that draw play that inflated our stats between the 20's and was utterly useless in the redzone. They also added a 1st round pick in Felix the previous year, but even then the running game was mostly a mirage, and the Vikings proved it in the playoffs.

Today they have half the tools to make a running game work. The other half is always the running backs, and they are among the very worst in the league at this position.
Click to expand...

You're really desperate for that to be the case, but it's supported by no evidence, so:

xoGkq.jpg
 

Attachments

  • xoGkq.jpg
    xoGkq.jpg
    70.4 KB · Views: 0
Clay_Allison said:
You're really desperate for that to be the case, but it's supported by no evidence, so:

xoGkq.jpg
Click to expand...

No but the Giants are solid. Dallas is one of the worst. I'm just not even sure what to say anymore. McFadden is basically a better player then any of their RBs and that is sad.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
No but the Giants are solid. Dallas is one of the worst. I'm just not even sure what to say anymore. McFadden is basically a better player then any of their RBs and that is sad.
Click to expand...

I'd put this group on par with the 2007 group and light years ahead of 2003 and 2009. If we run it 500+ times we'll get the job done. We may not get the peak value dominating performances Murray gave us last year, but we'll get consistent production.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Yeah, I'd say since the O-line added an all pro at guard, I'd say it probably had a little something to do with Romo's improvement. What ever happened to you guys preaching about the O-line and D-line being the most important thing. Now it's suddenly all about the RB.
Click to expand...

When the RB was a key part of your team and you lost and failed to replace him, yeah it's important.

I'm not desperate for Dallas' RB's to be bad. At least they are young outside of McFadden.

But if you tell me they are better than these guys, as in the rest of the conference outside of the Giants and maybe Bucs, I disagree:

Alfred Morris/Matt Jones NO
DeMarco Murray/Ryan Mathews NO
Jennings/Vereen/ Andre Williams TIE

Eddie Lacey/James Starks HELL NO
Joique Bell/Ameer Abdullah NO
Adrian Peterson NO
Matt Forte NO

Mark Ingram/CJ Spiller NO
Tevin Coleman NO
Johnathon Stewart Man, can't believe this, but NO
Doug Martin MAYBE

Beast Mode HELL THE F NO
Carlos Hyde/Mike Davis/Reggie Bush NO
David Johnson NO
Todd Gurley NO WAY
 
God damn, this RB argument thing is getting really f'ing old. It has taken over like 4-5 threads. I know it's the offseason, but Jesus H.
 
Iamtdg said:
God damn, this RB argument thing is getting really f'ing old. It has taken over like 4-5 threads. I know it's the offseason, but Jesus H.
Click to expand...

So who in the conference are our current RB's better than? The thread is titled: "Jerry Jones sees Dallas Cowboys with better run game in 2015" after all.
 
Iamtdg said:
God damn, this RB argument thing is getting really f'ing old. It has taken over like 4-5 threads. I know it's the offseason, but Jesus H.
Click to expand...

So anyways, Joseph Randle sucks.
 
ravidubey said:
So who in the conference are our current RB's better than? The thread is titled: "Jerry Jones sees Dallas Cowboys with better run game in 2015" after all.
Click to expand...

The other 4 aren't titled that, and btw I didn't quote your post, so I wasn't referring to that one post. I was just stating a fact... that this argument has taken over like 4-5 threads. And it is really f'ing annoying.
 
Iamtdg said:
The other 4 aren't titled that, and btw I didn't quote your post, so I wasn't referring to that one post. I was just stating a fact... that this argument has taken over like 4-5 threads. And it is really f'ing annoying.
Click to expand...

Then merge the threads into a megathread, so you are not so offended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom