Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do think the Cowboys can be successful with a less than DeMarco Murray back but I don't think you can easily replace what he did outside of running the ball. That might take a year or 2 of seasoning if they intend on using a rookie back there...
I am very happy that DeMarco got a big contract. I think he deserved it and it pizzes me off to hear radio sports commentators say; "WHY would the Cowboys give Murray a big contract after running him into the ground last year"..? Seems to me that is exactly why you give him a big contract... oh well! I guess I am old fashioned in that respect.
This could be a very prudent move on the Cowboys part but refusing to overpay super stars only appeases your fans IF your winning Super Bowls (ala New England Patriots)... If the Cowboys don't make the playoffs next year, you can bet most fans will point to losing Murray as a big reason WHY!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65
True, but those teams were not committed to running the ball and of course DeMarco could not play an entire season due to injury.
It just seems to me that they finally found a winning formula or identity which is running the ball and then they let the biggest piece of that formula walk away! They assume they can replace DeMarco with any one of a dozen different backs and I simply do not think that is true. Odds are that even with DeMarco the Cowboys running game was likely to take a step back next year but now there is no question (unless they swing an AP trade) this offense will digress next year.. IMO
That being said, I still think this team is better than the Eagles. Unless Sam Bradford is better than he has shown over the past few years, no way they leap frog the Cowboys..
while losing murray is going to put a dent in the dallas offense, they still have options. they can pick up an FA, though most of those are either inconsistent, or too expensive.
they can draft a running back, though chances are the one they would want, gordon, wont be available when dallas gets to their pick, number 27.
and then there is randle and dunbar. both decent backs, but dont have a great deal of experience since they played behind murray. imo randle will probably be the starter next season, and dunbar will platoon in and out as needed. the question is, can randle or dunbar handle the load if the other is injured?
one more thing we have to remember, good running backs can do great things behind a good offensive line, and dallas has built a really good offensive line, so i think if he stay healthy, randle can do the job very well this season.
It is a big price point - honestly I can't figure out what the heck is going on here
Release Shady at 11 million a year
Sign the SD back then Murray for 42 Million over 5 years
Bradford at 13 million a year for Foles at 1.2 million a year plus draft picks
Murray was a horse last year but to me backs get old fast - wear and tear -think Shady started to show that not that I dont think Murray has gas in the tank
I think Murray is tough to replace - as in many ways was Shady - Murray and Shady are at least in the same league but I don't understand the Eagles strategy - I see the Cowboys perspective heer more then what Chip is doing with the Birds - hope I am wrong
The Cowboy signing of McFadden is troublesome to me. I don't care what line you have blocking your running back, if he can't stay healthy, he just can't stay healthy. I currently live in Arkansas and remember rooting on McFadden and Jones at the Razorback games. Jones is looking to get back into football by going to the veterans combine and I'm just not sure that McFadden can stay healthy. He's a bit suspect from the waste down. He's stacked up top, but he's so little down low.
but signing mcfadden gives the cowboys three decent running backs, and chances are they will draft a fourth back that they can then bring along in their system.
It is a big price point - honestly I can't figure out what the heck is going on here
Release Shady at 11 million a year
Sign the SD back then Murray for 42 Million over 5 years
Bradford at 13 million a year for Foles at 1.2 million a year plus draft picks
Murray was a horse last year but to me backs get old fast - wear and tear -think Shady started to show that not that I dont think Murray has gas in the tank
I think Murray is tough to replace - as in many ways was Shady - Murray and Shady are at least in the same league but I don't understand the Eagles strategy - I see the Cowboys perspective heer more then what Chip is doing with the Birds - hope I am wrong
Kelly wants his people... or people that want him.
He has a vision for his system so he is getting the people he wants instead of having the people who were already there and may not totally buy in to what he is doing.
McFadden basically counts 200k against the cap. If he doesn't work out, Dallas moves on without being hurt. I personally am glad Dallas did not bring back Demarco at that price. 42 million and 21 million guaranteed. Let him go.
And it's wonderful to see that they did what I wanted them to do. A 4 year 24-28 million dollar contract would have been good. Nothing any higher. Those silly contracts are a thing of the pass with this franchise and I for one am amazed at seeing it. I know every Dallas fan I know that's followed this team is amazed at the 180 Jerry has done. No 50 million contracts to cornerbacks anymore.
And it's wonderful to see that they did what I wanted them to do. A 4 year 24-28 million dollar contract would have been good. Nothing any higher. Those silly contracts are a thing of the pass with this franchise and I for one am amazed at seeing it. I know every Dallas fan I know that's followed this team is amazed at the 180 Jerry has done. No 50 million contracts to cornerbacks anymore.
I say Stephen is making the football decisions now. I firmly believe Jerry would have given DeMarco as much as he wanted and crippled the team for another 5 years, like he did all of the last 16 years.
I say Stephen is making the football decisions now. I firmly believe Jerry would have given DeMarco as much as he wanted and crippled the team for another 5 years, like he did all of the last 16 years.
I agree with this but if the Cowboys slip behind the Eagles next year and DeMarco has another great year, fans will blame Jerry not Stephen..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They assume they can replace DeMarco with any one of a dozen different backs and I simply do not think that is true. Odds are that even with DeMarco the Cowboys running game was likely to take a step back next year but now there is no question (unless they swing an AP trade) this offense will digress next year.. IMO 
