Darren McFadden

[ThoughtExperiment]

I sometimes listen to this OKC radio show with Okie State's former coach Pat Jones, who is one of Jimmy's BFFs and still has some good ties to the Cowboys (probably Ciskowski and a couple others). He claims McFadden is the guy the coaches are really excited about and expecting big things from this year. According to him, Randle isn't being counted on for anything special.

 

[peplaw06]

Some people may have thought Murray would have a good season last year... I thought he would be good enough if he stayed healthy, which he did. But I don't think anyone would have said before 2014 that he would run for 1800+ yards, and 100 yards 3 out of every 4 games. I don't think they would even say that if he were here in 2015. That was an outstanding season and was essentially unpredictable.

McFadden, Randle, etc. aren't going to replace that kind of production... Now could McFadden run for 800-900 and Randle for 600-700 in a RBBC? Sure. I'd take 1300-1500 rushing yards from them. I think that would put us in a pretty good spot. Maybe not 12-4, but in contention for the East title.

 

[Iamtdg]

The only reason I wouldn't have predicted Murray would have a great year last year is because we had been so pass happy in previous seasons. If I had known we would be so committed to running the ball I would have predicted a big year for him. I mean that man averaged in the high 4's in YPC with shit at OL in 2011.

 

[Doomsday]

Every dog has his day so ya never know. McFadden might live up to his draft status and set the league on fire. Then again he might just be the same ole.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

The only reason I wouldn't have predicted Murray would have a great year last year is because we had been so pass happy in previous seasons. If I had known we would be so committed to running the ball I would have predicted a big year for him. I mean that man averaged in the high 4's in YPC with shit at OL in 2011.

You're doing it wrong, iam... You're supposed to say that we couldn't possibly run the ball so there was no point in even trying...

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

Some people may have thought Murray would have a good season last year... I thought he would be good enough if he stayed healthy, which he did. But I don't think anyone would have said before 2014 that he would run for 1800+ yards, and 100 yards 3 out of every 4 games. I don't think they would even say that if he were here in 2015. That was an outstanding season and was essentially unpredictable.

McFadden, Randle, etc. aren't going to replace that kind of production... Now could McFadden run for 800-900 and Randle for 600-700 in a RBBC? Sure. I'd take 1300-1500 rushing yards from them. I think that would put us in a pretty good spot. Maybe not 12-4, but in contention for the East title.

If the defense improves as hoped, we will neither get nor need Murray's production. We should be playing with a shorter field. I think that we can potentially score more TDs, and I will take that over more yards.

 

[Iamtdg]

You're doing it wrong, iam... You're supposed to say that we couldn't possibly run the ball so there was no point in even trying...

My post was just a typo... what I said and "we couldn't possibly run the ball so there was no point in even trying" are right next to each other on the keyboard. Fat-fingered it.

 

[Doomsday]

I think that we can potentially score more TDs, and I will take that over more yards.

Give up fewer, score moar. No matter how it is done.

 

[Dodger12]

Nobody is thinking that DMac OR Randal will do what Murray did.

But is it silly in thinking that DMac AND Randal can do for our offense what Murray did?

And how silly would it have been at this exact same time LAST year, if someone came up to you and told you that Murray would rush for over 1,800+ yards, knowing for him to accomplish such he would have to play a full season, something he NEVER DONE since his freshman year in college.

The point is, nobody knew at this very same moment last year, that Murray would have the kind of season that he did; just like nobody right now knows what McFaddan OR Randal will do this upcoming season, to claim otherwise is what is silly.

Not sure anyone could have predicted that Murray would have a record breaking year but, if healthy, I think folks thought he could be the work horse the team needed. Having said that, I'm not sure anyone thought Garrett was going to give him the ball anyway but Romo's bad back made it necessary.

At the end of the day, we learned that we have a very good OL and quality running game makes Romo a better QB and helps the D. I'm more concerned with maintaining that philosophy than I am with any particular player. Murray had the tools to be a #1 back. His only question was health. With DMac, he's a bust....we know what he is and I'm not looking for him to get those tough yards needed to move the chains and wear down a D. What's silly is when folks believe that when a player puts on a Cowboys jersey that he's somehow better and will be something he never was.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

Not sure anyone could have predicted that Murray would have a record breaking year but, if healthy, I think folks thought he could be the work horse the team needed. Having said that, I'm not sure anyone thought Garrett was going to give him the ball anyway but Romo's bad back made it necessary.

When healthy, I thought he could be a 1,200+ yard RB and good for 8 TDs. I'd been happy with that. I don't see why McFaddan or Randal cannot achieve that. 1,200+ yards isn't such a great feat when you break it down over 16 games at 75 yards per game or 3.75 yards per carry.

Even if Murray stayed, I doubt he's accomplish that feat again, and even more certain that he will not do so with the Eagles.

At the end of the day, we learned that we have a very good OL and quality running game makes Romo a better QB and helps the D. I'm more concerned with maintaining that philosophy than I am with any particular player. Murray had the tools to be a #1 back. His only question was health. With DMac, he's a bust....we know what he is and I'm not looking for him to get those tough yards needed to move the chains and wear down a D. What's silly is when folks believe that when a player puts on a Cowboys jersey that he's somehow better and will be something he never was.

No. Your thinking is cock-eyed and contradictory. Nobody thinks that. What people do think and they are not silly for thinking such, is that McFaddan behind a better Oline than what he had in Oakland; with a better QB than what he had in Oakland; with an all-around better team than what he had in Oakland, why can't he be a better RB than what he was in Oakland?

I'm certain if Murray was in Oakland, he wouldn't have had the record-setting year he had with the Cowboys. It wouldn't be silly but downright foolish to think otherwise.

Most people are cautiously optimistic when it comes to McFaddan. This is basically his last chance to resurrect his career. But it's also a chance to gauge the Oline.

You claim that Cwboys' fans think that McFaddan will somehow be better and will be something he never was, but injuries played a part in that... LIKE WITH Murray.

 

[Dodger12]

When healthy, I thought he could be a 1,200+ yard RB and good for 8 TDs. I'd been happy with that. I don't see why McFaddan or Randal cannot achieve that. 1,200+ yards isn't such a great feat when you break it down over 16 games at 75 yards per game or 3.75 yards per carry.

3.75 yards a carry won't cut it and keep defenses honest. I wouldn't be happy with that. Murray showed flashes as a rookie and I'm not convinced a RBBC approach is the right one for our offense. Matter of fact, I can't really think of a RBBC team that's been an effective championship caliber team. I'm not talking about a change of pace back like Jones or Bradshaw.

No. Your thinking is cock-eyed and contradictory. Nobody thinks that. What people do think and they are not silly for thinking such, is that McFaddan behind a better Oline than what he had in Oakland; with a better QB than what he had in Oakland; with an all-around better team than what he had in Oakland, why can't he be a better RB than what he was in Oakland?

Maybe, sometimes, year after year where someone doesn't live up to their draft status, it might be the player. The excuses for McFadden have been over the top. I never put our poor running game on OL, but rather the HC that refused to run the ball as part of his offensive scheme. Murray has the rookie record for yards in a game. Yes, Murray was hurt his rookie year but some of his accomplishments rank up there with some RB greats. At the very least, Murray showed some promise but homers would have everyone believe we didn't have an adequate line. Now that we have a line, we take our chances with the RB position. We're so close to being a championship caliber team that we're hinging our offensive philosophy that worked on a player that any logical person would have described as a bust. Unless, of course, he puts on a Cowboys uniform then he's reincarnated and all the excuses come out of the woodwork.

Most people are cautiously optimistic when it comes to McFaddan. This is basically his last chance to resurrect his career. But it's also a chance to gauge the Oline.

So if McFadden isn't successful it's on the OL? What does that mean...."gauge the OL?" The OL has nothing to prove to me and it shouldn't have anything to prove to you. Derrick Lassic couldn't run behind arguably one of the greatest lines in Cowboys history and a SB worthy line at that. Keep hoping a scrub like Randle will run wild with this line or McFadden can get the tough yards. Hey, don't get me wrong; I hope so too. I'm just not as optimistic as you.

 

[Doomsday]

So if McFadden isn't successful it's on the OL? What does that mean...."gauge the OL?" The OL has nothing to prove to me and it shouldn't have anything to prove to you.

I think Laz is saying that if McFadden has a breakout year, beyond all expectations, people will say it's due to the OL not so much, to him.

 

[LAZARUS_LOGAN]

3.75 yards a carry won't cut it and keep defenses honest. I wouldn't be happy with that. Murray showed flashes as a rookie and I'm not convinced a RBBC approach is the right one for our offense. Matter of fact, I can't really think of a RBBC team that's been an effective championship caliber team. I'm not talking about a change of pace back like Jones or Bradshaw.

The 3.75 yards is the floor on 20 carries. I doubt McFaddan averages that many carries, considering that there was only two* RBs : Murray and Foster, that average 20+ carries. 15 carries equals 5 ypc., let's split the differen and get 4.3 ypc. Yes behind nthis OL, I tink McFadden can average that.

The Patriots were successful with an RBBC in Antowain Smith and Kevin Faulk.

The Panthers with Dais and Foster.

The Raiders with Garner and Wheatly.

The Giants with Barber and Dayne.

The Ravens with Lewis and Holmes.

The Eagles with Westbrook and Levins.

The Colts with Addai and Rhodes.

The Giants with Jacobs and Ward.

Maybe, sometimes, year after year where someone doesn't live up to their draft status, it might be the player. The excuses for McFadden have been over the top. I never put our poor running game on OL, but rather the HC that refused to run the ball as part of his offensive scheme.

You have Costa at center, and then both Livings and Bernadeau as your starting guards... yes, you can blame the OL. Much like now you can credit the OL with Murray's success.

And nobody is making excuses for McFadden. That's just a strawman argument that you've come up with. As I said, most people are cautiously optimistic about McFadden. He's on a better team with a better cast of characters. All we can do is wait and see.

Murray has the rookie record for yards in a game. Yes, Murray was hurt his rookie year but some of his accomplishments rank up there with some RB greats. At the very least, Murray showed some promise but homers would have everyone believe we didn't have an adequate line. Now that we have a line, we take our chances with the RB position. We're so close to being a championship caliber team that we're hinging our offensive philosophy that worked on a player that any logical person would have described as a bust. Unless, of course, he puts on a Cowboys uniform then he's reincarnated and all the excuses come out of the woodwork.

Murray was in a contract year. Just maybe that inspired him. It's doubtful that he'll rush for that many yards ever again, whether he remained with the Cowboys or not. If most of us didn't expect Murray to repeat the feat even if he stayed, why would YOU think most of us would expect McFadden to accomplish Murray's feat? We keep saying that he doesn't need to, for us to succeed.

The way you are carrying on, it would appear that you are hoping McFadden and Randal stinks it up, just so that you can be right. Now that's not silly, but downright foolish.

So if McFadden isn't successful it's on the OL? What does that mean...."gauge the OL?" The OL has nothing to prove to me and it shouldn't have anything to prove to you. Derrick Lassic couldn't run behind arguably one of the greatest lines in Cowboys history and a SB worthy line at that. Keep hoping a scrub like Randle will run wild with this line or McFadden can get the tough yards. Hey, don't get me wrong; I hope so too. I'm just not as optimistic as you.

Did I say or even infer that? To gauge the OL outside of Murray. You seem to give Murray more credit than you do the OL. And in response , since you think McFadden is a bust, then with this OL we will see.

 

[Sheik]

I didn't read this bible. Whatcha guys talkin about in here?

 

[Statman]

But Statman... tell us about the stats or RBs that had 370+ carries the previous season, and how they did the following.

I'm impressed with the fact that you used 370 carries or more as the data pool rather than what most TV analysts have been doing. Many of them are far too proud of the C- they got in "Math for Journalism Majors". They typically use only those RB's that had a season in which they exceeded Murray's carries, 7 in total. There are numerous reasons for this information to be meaningless.

You cannot compare production to a group in which that person is not included. All I have to do to invalidate any claim is to declare that Murray is not in the group of "RB's that have exceeded Murray's number of carries in a season". You place the number you wish to test as the median, or middle value of the group.

Since the record number of carries of 416 is 24 runs more than Murray's 392, we can say that the highest number of carries is "within" 24 of 392. Since 368 carries is exactly 24 less than 392, it is most appropriate to say that 368 is also "within" 24 of 392. In fact, any RB with 368 or more carries are "within" 22 carries of 392.

I'm not in agreement that checking their numbers the following season is quite as fair. The real question with DeMarco Murray was whether he was going to be worth the value of his next contract, is this not so? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to measure the productivity of each player following their record carries by using the results of the next 3 years?

In any case, here are the results that you requested:

Player Year Age* Tm Att Yds TD
Barry Foster 1992 24 PIT 390 1690 11
Christian Okoye 1989 28 KAN 370 1480 12
Curtis Martin* 1995 22 NWE 368 1487 14
Curtis Martin* 1998 25 NYJ 369 1287 8
Curtis Martin* 2004 31 NYJ 371 1697 12
DeMarco Murray 2014 26 DAL 392 1845 13
Earl Campbell* 1979 24 HOU 368 1697 19
Earl Campbell* 1980 25 HOU 373 1934 13
Eddie George 2000 27 TEN 403 1509 14
Edgerrin James 1999 21 IND 369 1553 13
Edgerrin James 2000 22 IND 387 1709 13
Emmitt Smith* 1992 23 DAL 373 1713 18
Emmitt Smith* 1994 25 DAL 368 1484 21
Emmitt Smith* 1995 26 DAL 377 1773 25
Eric Dickerson* 1983 23 RAM 390 1808 18
Eric Dickerson* 1984 24 RAM 379 2105 14
Eric Dickerson* 1986 26 RAM 404 1821 11
Eric Dickerson* 1988 28 IND 388 1659 14
George Rogers 1981 23 NOR 378 1674 13
Gerald Riggs 1985 25 ATL 397 1719 10
Jamal Anderson 1998 26 ATL 410 1846 14
Jamal Lewis 2003 24 BAL 387 2066 14
James Wilder 1984 26 TAM 407 1544 13
Jerome Bettis* 1997 25 PIT 375 1665 7
John Riggins* 1983 34 WAS 375 1347 24
LaDainian Toml 2002 23 SDG 372 1683 14
Larry Johnson 2006 27 KAN 416 1789 17
Marcus Allen* 1985 25 RAI 380 1759 11
Michael Turner 2008 26 ATL 376 1699 17
Ricky Williams 2002 25 MIA 383 1853 16
Ricky Williams 2003 26 MIA 392 1372 9
Shaun Alexan 2005 28 SEA 370 1880 27
Terrell Davis 1997 25 DEN 369 1750 15
Terrell Davis 1998 26 DEN 392 2008 21
Walter Payton* 1979 25 CHI 369 1610 14
Walter Payton* 1984 30 CHI 381 1684 11

You basically have a list of the greatest RB's in the history of the NFL.

45.9% of these seasons were produced by eventual Hall of Famers.

54.0% of these seasons were produced by someone who did it more than once. It's difficult to say that a player has a high probability of declining when more than half of these seasons either get repeated or are already repeats.

The average age is 25.5. The average point in their career is 4.5 seasons. Interesting since they average a career span of 10.5 seasons, meaning the season occurred around the midpoint of their career. So much for the myth that a season such as this will destroy an RB's career.

The youngest RB was 21 (Edgerin James), the oldest 34 (John Riggins).

The average number of thousand yard seasons over the following 3 seasons is 1.5. The average number over their remaining career is 2.7. On the average, a RB that has had a season in which his carries are 368 or more will have almost 3 more years of thousand yard seasons.


26.1% had 3 consecutive thousand yards seasons immediately following.

47.8 has 2 thousand yard seasons in 3.

78.2% had at least 1.

This data by no means guarantees that DeMarco Murray would continue on his record breaking pace. However, it slams the door shut on any perception that DeMarco was in any way a high percentage risk. This, of course, is just one of many myths about DeMarco Murray. I suppose many of them were so quickly accepted as a means of justification for the actions of the Cowboy management.

Is DeMarco Murray an elite RB? I'll put it to you this way:

He starts the season out by breaking a 50 year old record of an historically elite RB like Jim Brown. He ends the season by breaking the single season record of the guy who is the historical leader in NFL history, Emmitt Smith.

When you are breaking the records of some of the most elite RB's in history, doesn't that pretty much make you an elite RB?

Other items to ponder:

DeMarco Murray is the first Cowboy RB since Emmitt Smith at the turn of the century to record back to back thousand yard seasons.

The Cowboys have recorded a thousand yard rusher 25 times in 55 seasons. DeMarco Murray is only the 4th RB in Cowboy history to record multiple thousand yard seasons.

DeMarco's 2013 thousand yard season was the 2nd highest in Cowboy history for average yards per carry of 5.17. That was the season before our elite O-line given the most credit for this past season. Emmitt's 1993 Super Bowl season was ranked #1 at 5.25 yards per carry. You remember don't you? The year he sat out the first two games which the Cowboy's lost? The guy responsible for that decision was the same guy that is assuring you the running game will be better this year. You may want to adjust his credibility.

Last season DeMarco also broke the Cowboys single season mark for total yards from scrimmage which was 2261, that's 13 more yards than Emmitt Smith's 1995 Super Bowl season.

DeMarco Murray is ranked 3rd in Cowboy history for RB's first four seasons of rushing yards. The two top guys are in the Hall of Fame.

If you wish to debate my opinions that is certainly your right. However, 90% of what I have just posted are statistical facts unless I have made a mathematical error in my calculations. Feel free to check.

 

[Rock Slamdance]

Tl;dr x100000

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

 

[UVAwahoos]

Scrolling past Statman's post even took inconveniently too long.

 

[Statman]

Um.....yeah.....

I'm a Cowboy fan, big time. They have been a part of life for a little while now and I don't deliberately look for negative. I try to mix in both.

Being a fan, I can be critical in the same way you might be critical of a family member. You love them but you are concerned for them when you believe they have made a mistake. I want this team to win and I think they took a huge step backwards with some of their most recent decisions.

I wasn't on this site last year and I suppose it would be brash of me to tell you that last year I predicted a "Marshal Faulk like" season for Murray IF he could stay healthy. Why? Because of two reasons. First, he has always performed at a high level when he is healthy, no doubt about that, I could break out a dozen charts.Secondly, I began seeing improvement from the O-line as early as the last games of the 2012 season. They were on to something and when they got the last two guys in the first round I knew they had the potential to be legendary.

But legendary for what?

Any O-linemen from the Emmitt Smith days, or Walter Payton's line, or O.J.'s Electric Co. O-line will tell you that what inspired them the most was what their RB could do whenever he broke free. Also, they loved to dominate the ground by being , well, offensive. trutrh be told, they don't like to pass block because it puts them in a defensive posture, they are defending their QB,. But when you run, you are hitting them and they don't know where you are coming from all the time. Any O-linemen's wet dream is to get to the second level in the open with your RB behind you and the only guy in the way is an irritating little DB. They love the look in that DB's eyes when they realize what is between them and the guy with the ball.

There is a relationship between a back and his line when it relates to the success of the attack, the Captain Obvious. That relationship takes time to develop, not only between the back and the line but also the line among themselves. This line does have the potential to be great, what we saw was only a POTENTIAL glimpse, stuff happens, knock on wood, etc, etc, .....but know this line must develop a different, rhythm, you might say, that is compatible to the guys they now have. They pretty much knew what Murray's open field tendencies were and could anticipate the direction needed blocking. That's not going to exist in the same manner as before with Murray.

I have made what seems to others to be a pretty bold prediction:

A rookie free agent RB will make a very significant contribution to the success of the team in the 2015 season.

I believe in these coaches. I believe the Cowboys have scouts with some of the best intuition when it comes to acquiring rookie free agents. Yes, Murray was a step backwards is all I'm saying. Let's watch them take two steps forward. That's typically how progress works.

Hey! McFadden has some of the surest hands in the NFL, his carry to fumble ratio is one of the best in the NFL among active RB's.

 

[Doomsday]

Well, welcome to the site Statman. But I trust Carrot Top about as much as I would trust a rattler. He is a useful idiot IMO.

Your analysis re: backs and their relationship with the o-line is spot on as is your observation about attacking vs, defending if you're pass blocking all the time. A attitude develops when you're mostly run blocking, a espirit de corps that is sorely lacking in a pass-first scheme. This is why pass happy teams can't run the ball when it's sorely needed and never could.

The doubt I have is, that Carrot Top recognizes this as well. Your prediction about a UDFA rookie RB making significant contribution assumes they will continue to run the ball as frequently as last year, vs. their pattern of the last few years prior, to pass it a lot more.

I believe they will be returning to the patterns of the past, with a ostensibly healthy Romo getting 45-50 pass attempts a game or so, and the running game seeing only 20 attempts or so. This is why we didn't draft a RB, this is why they are saying we're good with the group we have. Because they simply don't intend to be run-heavy going forward.