7.8 Reasons Why Dallas Should Start Felix Jones
I'm back with another edition of my Felix Jones-is-Tiki Barber-redux campaign. Using K.C. Joyner's run metrics from Scientific Football '09 and from the new Maple Street Press Cowboys Annual 2009, I'm going to present more evidence why Dallas should return to the running back platoon it used so effectively in 2007 with Julius Jones and Marion Barber. What's more, I'm going to demonstrate why I believe Felix should get Julius old starters job and push Barber back into the closer's spot.
Joyner's "Dallas by the Numbers" piece in the Cowboys Annual records running back performance by run type. He lists seven types of running plays -- counters, draws, drives, isolations, off-tackles, slants/stretches and tosses/sweeps. I'm not going to present Joyner's breakdowns here (sorry folks, you'll have to buy the magazine) but I am going to repackage his stats in two categories.
Make the jump for the rest.
I'm going to catalog two types of runs. "Between the tackles" runs are the isos, dives, draws and counters. Outside runs are off tackles, stretch plays and tosses and sweeps.
Inside Runs
| Player | Attempts | Yards | Yds. per Att. |
| Marion Barber | 137 | 620 | 4.5 |
| Tashard Choice | 59 | 310 | 5.3 |
| Felix Jones | 17 | 133 | 7.8 |
Outside Runs
| Player | Attempts | Yards | Yds. per Att. |
| Marion Barber | 94 | 243 | 2.6 |
| Tashard Choice | 32 | 156 | 4.9 |
| Felix Jones | 11 | 178 | 16.2 |
The difference on outside runs is staggering. Jones is a touchdown threat any time he takes the ball to a defense's perimeter. His inside numbers make the case to start him. Jones didn't get many inside carries last year, but he was just as much a touchdown threat on these plays.
Jones dominated across the board. He did not run a dive play last year, but he had team-best averages on five of the other six run types. Had Choice not posted a slightly better average on draws, Jones would have run the table.
Felix Jones has the look of a special back. He's bulked up to 212 pounds this offseason. He gives Dallas the best option on first downs, because defenses cannot stereotype him as a perimeter runner. If the do, he'll burn them on a counter or isolation run.
Make him the starter. He'll give the team better performances on early drives and he'll make Barber a better runner, by letting him reprise his role as a late-half hammer.
0 recs |
225 comments
|
Comments
Wow.....great article.
You make it look so simple it almost dumb not to make the call to play Jones as the starter.
The only things that worries me about Felix is how his career has started just like Julius Jones’ career started. Great speed threat, but got injured. Julius was never the same after he got hurt. Let’s hope that is not the case for Felix as he really looked special last year.
We need the O-line to be healthy this year for this to work. With Felix, Barber and Choice as the RB’s, I am also thinking Williams, Witten, Bennet, Crayton and Austin should also have a good year.
by ManTab on Jul 20, 2009 11:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Felix
has much much better speed and quickness that JJ had. either way, if he starts or not he should touch the ball 15-20 a game not including KR or PR if he does that.
Texas Stadium has a hole in the roof so God can watch his favorite team play football.
by iCowboy on Jul 20, 2009 11:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Felix also doesnt have Tuna in his head...
One of the things that really hurt JJ was that Parcells wanted him to run the EXACT way the play was designed and was chastised for bouncing it outside. Which was why we would see so many runs of JJ running right into a lineman back for none yards.
I think as long as he is allowed to run on instinct he can do great as a starter.
Whether you think you can or you think you can't either way your right
by UnNessecsary Roughness on Jul 21, 2009 3:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Felix's field vision and his ability to wait for his blocks to develop seems far superior to Julius'
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 5:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Julius may or may not have had trouble with Parcells’ demands, but he was not good at all at finding a crease and accelerating through it. Choice and Felix both seem to have the feel they need to find the hole and cut decisively.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 7:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you forget
JJ had no instincts and BP didn’t trust him. it was a misnomer that bp made him into a robot. none of these players that were happy for BP to leave and said the shackles are off, did anything afterward and in fact returned to what BP had told them to do. JJ didn’t do much in seattle neither.
by CowboysFanatic on Jul 21, 2009 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
JJ was a joke
Lets just say he deserved to play in Seattle ….
cuz thats all he ever was … a replacement pushover too Alexander
overrated POS
by fuji1232 on Jul 28, 2009 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do this in Madden
haha and i usually put MB3 at fb
"Aw Shucks" - Wade Phillips
by MrMinority on Jul 21, 2009 12:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
ditto
Felix is a monster in Madden.
by DoomsdayD75 on Jul 21, 2009 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he's going to be monster for real too
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have we seen enough of his pass catching ability?
Or blocking? These are the only rational reasons I can think of as to why Garrett didnt utilize him more often when he was healthy.
x
by BlueZombie on Jul 21, 2009 12:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point.
How bout if Felix starts and Barber closes, but Barber comes in on 3rd down packages to block, receive, run a draw, etc.?
All eyes on Free.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 12:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it only makes sense if Felix shows poor blocking abilities
otherwise you’d want the faster back available on long-yardage situations… Barber might help in blocking, but what other skills does he bring that are better suited to the situation than Felix?
Tar Heels = National Champs in Basketball ... #1 in Baseball ... Top 10 this year in Football?
by DalaiLuke on Jul 21, 2009 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barber is an excellent pass receiver...
and with the TEs being utilized in the passing game on passing downs, somebody has to stay in to repel blitzers.
Obviously, any draws or runs where the O needs to pick up 5+ yards on 3rd down should go to Felix, but Barber is still the warrior and heart of this offense. I can see Barber being the 3rd down FB in those 3WR 2RB shotgun formations. Defenses are gonna be so confused this season!
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about both in the 2 TE set?
Imagine Barber, Felix, Roy Williams, Witten, and Bennett on the field together.
Run or pass? Either way, you’re picking an awful potent poison.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Any wide recievers in that formation?
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
by GunsUp on Jul 21, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that would even be great in the hurry up.
With 4 minutes left till half, they want to chew up some clock without having to rely on the running game. Short passes. Stay in bounds. Clock, clock, clock. Give the opponent’s D something to think about during halftime. Then, when they get the ball in the 3rd, come out with multiple wideouts and have Romo run a no huddle.
Makes me tired even thinking about that.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Still it sounds like
some version of a wishbone, or even an I formation. I can’t really see them having Witten, Bennet, Jones and Barber all in at the same time, unless it is a lead draw for short yardage, or a screen of some sort.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
by GunsUp on Jul 21, 2009 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, and then they would end up motioning somebody out wide anyways.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And that could be Jones
I believe he was a WR at some point in his past and caught a lot of passes.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess the point is that
that formation would have a lot of short drops or power plays. There aren’t going to be many 7 step drops and throwing 50 yards down field.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
by GunsUp on Jul 21, 2009 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
Felix could either motion wide or line up out there. There’s no reason he can’t get down field
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Au contraire
With Roy Williams split left, Felix motioning right and both Witten and Bennett a threat on the seams, there’s no reason a 7 step drop couldn’t be effective, because you still have Barber on the play-action protecting the middle and one or both of the TEs chipping on the rushers.
A perfect max-protect scheme that no one, not even Garrett, could guess which is the primary receiver.
On a 3rd and 5, there’s not a defense in the world that could properly defend all options (including a draw, max run blocking, short outs, TE screens, wheel route by Barber, Felix (1-on-1) in the flat, RW on a slant, Witten (with a LB) on the seam, etc, etc.
Huge advantage to the O.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 1:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can see that.
Have the TE seal the edge and run a screen with Barber at the corner, or send Jones to the slot.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
by GunsUp on Jul 21, 2009 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You use Witten or Bennett
as the H-back, the other at TE, Barber as the tailback and Jones in the slot.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You guys are forgetting
that Choice is a beast too. He ran against VERY good defenses and still did very well. I think we should start Felix, with Choice as the back up for the first half, then in the second half, replace choice with Barber for the closing role, and put choice to rest. What do you guys think?
by Rickyy. on Jul 21, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think...
if you aren’t having Barber in at all in the first half then you are making a big mistake.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
a few sprinklings in there wouldn’t hurt, but just enough to keep him rested to close it out.
by Rickyy. on Jul 21, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barber is more valuable then anyone here gives him credit for.
He doesn’t need an entire half to be rested.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Football Outsiders agree with you
They give Tashard the 5th best DVOA of all RB’s here. Felix tops the list at No.1. Granted, both are in the below 100 carries bracket, but still …
by One.Cool.Customer on Jul 21, 2009 3:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we all know
that Barber is a beast. No one is saying he isn’t valuable, because most teams would kill to have a guy like him. But he’s became well known as a closer, and that’s a role he thrived in. What I was thinking is, if you have him well rested, he’ll tear down opposing defenses without ever breaking a sweat.
I don’t know the best way to use our RB’s, but you have to use all three. They’re all very good, but you have to use them in a way that utilizes their strengths, like Barber and his closing power.
by Rickyy. on Jul 21, 2009 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably
Since blocking is a key responsibility, on a pass-first team especially. But they also seemed very reluctant to use rookies in general.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 7:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1 Its bring rookies along slowly mentality. Its not necessarily a bad thing.
Had Felix remained healthy I think there is no doubt his role would have expanded quickly. Regardless of whether MBIII remained healthy or not.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 7:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There was no "rational" reason to resist using Jones and Choice more last year
It was insanity and a flaw in coaching as far as I’m concerned. When given the opportunity to play they were both off the charts good. It was a waste of talent and stupid. I hope Phillips and Garrett both learned from their stupidity.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Choice was an oversight.
Felix got hurt.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
by GunsUp on Jul 21, 2009 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There was at least 1 game Felix was healthy and didn't play at all
The Cardinals maybe?
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Redskins?
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes but Garret said he screwed up.
The game played out in a way that he missed getting him involve. I know, I know, there is no excuse for letting a talent like that sit on the sideline but it happens to good coaches from time to time. I dont think it will happen again.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are mistakes and there is outright insanity
Not playing him for an entire game is inexcusable and is a very poor sign about a coach
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He played....
He just never saw any touches.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Still
You’re right. There wasn’t a reason that your most explosive player doesn’t see one offensive touch.
In fact the one time I remember him on the field, him being set in motion set up an easy Jason Witten TD.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I bet you could take Holmgrin, Landry, Walsh, and fill in the blank of top offensive mind,
and find somewhere in their first 2 years and they made the mistake of not getting a key player enough touches. You have a plan where you think its going to play out a certain way and it doesnt. He probably had several different plays drawn up for for Felix and the situation didnt play out the way it normally does. It wont happen again, That I can promise you.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Neither of us have time for that
I just think the magnitude of the mistake is too big to just say he made a mistake and owned up to it. I tried to think of an analolgy to make my point, another player who maybe is forgotten……and I couldn’t come up with a good example. No passes thrown to J. Witten for a game? Nothing for TO? Those aren’t even close. He is the most explosive player on the team! How can you just forget to not run a play for him. We’re both beating a dead horse by now.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 4:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad to see this viewpoint here, because unless MB outplays him in camp/preseason FJones should start!
I don’t think he’ll match those stats-he’s obviously not going to avg. 16 yards on every outside play, but if he holds up he should be the starter.
Except: 1) The small sample size, everyone needs to keep their pants on over this guy.
2) It just points out what a mistake MB’s contract was. I love the guy’s attitude, but RB is one of the easiest positions to fill and should never be overpaid. What a waste of cap space if he really does turn out to be the 3rd best back on the team! Not to mention that his style of play is going to cause more and more injuries.
Let’s hope GM Jerry writes this one down and never puts big money into a RB again.
by Realist Larry on Jul 21, 2009 12:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
But it's a hindsight issue
They didn’t know they were going to fall into two exceptional rookies when they signed Barber.
That said, I think the league is slowly inching away from huge money for RBs. I guess because they are easier to replace and most teams are using two-back systems anyway.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 7:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's crazy is that everybody else in the entire world could see that they fell into two exceptional rookies within the preseason alone.
Still, they tried to rely on a passing game that boasted TO and PC as the only healthy WRs and stubbornly used only Barber when there were 4 fresh legs on the bench.
So, you scored on your first preseason AND regular season carry…so what? So, you rock on special teams…big deal! You’re a rookie. No play for you!
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've gotta agree with this point of view.
It’s not that hard to tell when a RB has it. If you don’t want to count on them for pass protection, that’s one thing, but not running them . . .
"We'll see." --Bill Parcells
by Uncle Angus on Jul 21, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its not because he is a rookie though that will keep you out of games in certain situations,
Its because their is only 1 rock. Backs dont need 25 30 carries a game but 5-10 wont get it done either. Choice just wasnt going to play over the Known commodity of Barber.
I betcha if things were different and the boys put in Choice before MBIII got hurt and he missed a blitz pickup that got Romo killed this whole blog would be singing a differnt tune all together.
Tim Wilson is right about this year(me too) Its going to be hard to get everyone involved running. Some weeks someone is going to be neglected. It will be ok if we win but when we dont get ready for hard core whining.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sould read
I’t’s not because he is a rookie that he didnt play more but that parts of his game werent developed enough to trust him in all situations. They get better all though the season and get to play more as you go. You also have a rookie wall. These guys have never played 16 games before at this level of hitting. You dont want to burn them out to early either.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not the only one who got the feeling that the coaches didn't trust them simply because they were rookies.
At the time, it was all the discussion on DC.com too. Some coaches just don’t want to put rookies in that role. The unfortunate thing for the Cowboys was that both of their backup running backs were rookies.
If they are active and healthy and not fumbling, then why not play them? Sure, you risk them missing a block or too—like Felix did against AZ; but that was the exception, not the rule.
The thing that killed me is it felt like the coaching staff was hesitant even after Barber was hurt. I understand that with Romo out, they needed everybody to champ-up; but Barber had no explosion whatsoever. I would’ve rather given Alonzo Coleman some playtime rather than somebody who was ineffective. Those numbers up there don’t reflect what Barber has done in the past.
When you limit yourself with rooks, you can’t be scared to play them. That’s what they’re for. The coaches were stubborn last year. Either that or blind.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
keep in mind ....
the cowboys are a star-studded team
part of that is having to deal with the attitudes and the desires of letting someone play.
it seemed they clearly had the expectations that starters will start and gave them that option. that strategy might change this year and wade/garret might start putting in the players that they feel SHOULD be in.
but the last thing I think should be said … is what “COULD” have been.
choice had good games against PITT and Ravens, but they still lost (giants game was already over, not counting that)
the way I see it … when MB3 is in they have the better chance to WIN not just put up the fancy numbers and stats. thats the upside you count on.
by fuji1232 on Jul 28, 2009 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right, but it's a shame
Barber’s timing was excellent and his agent got him a great deal that is probably a waste of money now for the Cowboys. I did think it was excessive at the time, he will probably be finished in 2-3 more years.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure about how long he'll be productive
but I get your point about value. Add that to TO’s and Flo’s extensions and those are three moves that probably produced this past slow/low off-season.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 12:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's pretty pessimistic.
I think if they get him back into a role more suitable for him then he can last?
Was it maybe too much money? Probably, but he still is a very good running back that just needs to be put back into the role that made him the money to begin with.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're right
He’s definately not finished. My concern when the deal was signed was the length of commitment and amount of bonus to be spread over the life of the contract. I don’t see him playing at his current level for more than 2-3 more years. He takes a horrible beating
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is true.
He’s actually probably the only running back in the NFL that less touches means more productivity.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely not a hindsight issue
Team after team have found RB’s on the cheap. It’s an easy position to learn, and also one that wears guys down the fastest.
It should be a rule, and it would be smart to save $ for other positions.
by Realist Larry on Jul 21, 2009 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The salary cap is about to go away
and Jerry knew it. That’s why he signed all those long big money deals that are actually more like 3 year deals. If he wants, during an uncapped year he can dump those contracts.
by DoomsdayD75 on Jul 21, 2009 1:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Salary cap's not going anywhere
Too much at stake for both sides. A deal WILL get done.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think there is any way possible
for the league and the union to get anything done before next year. So at the very least I think 2010 will be uncapped.
by DoomsdayD75 on Jul 21, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I mean by hindsight
is that they didn’t want Julius and they had no one on the roster in case they let MBIII explore the market. Once they had two great prospects, it would have been easier to let Barber go. Not every prospect works out (for example J Jones) and I think they couldn’t stomach the risk.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you're saying
The y could have kept Jones, for one thing, cheaper-
or signed a cheaper FA and let some oher team overpay Barber for his 3.8 a carry.
FA RB’s are a dime/dozen.
It’s all done at this point, though-like some people say “Never draft a WR in the first round”, I just have a rule, “Never pay a RB big bucks.”
Special cases exempted, of course, eg Emmitt, maybe Julian Pet., etc.—true game-changers.
by Realist Larry on Jul 21, 2009 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean Adrian P.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also
there was a lot of conjecture around here about putting both Felix and Barber on the field, maybe along with 2 tight ends, to create matchup problems (none of us guessed how good Choice would look too).
That never really happened w/ the injury, but I hope we can see some creativity on that, esp. in the red zone.
Maybe these guys are so good we don’t even keep a FB?? We do have roster issues, if we keep the second kicker, for instance. I like having a true FB and don’t really like relying on TE’s as blockers all the time, but it’s a consideration. Just as an idea.
But this isn’t Madden…….
by Realist Larry on Jul 21, 2009 12:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure it really matters who plays when with the RBs we have
Sure, it’d be nice to have a fresh MB3 to hammer defenders in the 4th quarter, but I don’t see why the opposite can’t work just as well. Let Barber pound away on a defense, then put Felix in the game as a complete change of pace. I like the fact that Choice is sort of the ‘tweener. Not as fast as Felix, or as powerful as Barber, but he’s that efficient “find the hole and go for it” type that can cause all kinds of problems for defenses, especially ones that have already had Barber and Felix shoved down their throats.
And I will second the whole “Barber probably shouldn’t have gotten such a big contract” notion. It was silly to pay the guy so much, especially when you drafted two excellent young RBs, one of which proved he can be a work horse, and the other a proven playmaker. I love having MB3 on the team, don’t get me wrong, but I think Felix/Choice would be just a potent of a combination. Oh well, I guess we’ll just have to “deal” with three excellent RBs.
Epic Fail since 1985
by the red scare on Jul 21, 2009 1:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The difference being...
Chasing a guy for 3 qtrs take away your legs in the 4th making you more susceptible to standing flat footed and tired when power comes along to knock you over. You don’t use as much energy taking a guy head on in the 1st – 3rd Qtr’s of a game So you may wear him down physically this way but it much more effective in reverse.
Whether you think you can or you think you can't either way your right
by UnNessecsary Roughness on Jul 21, 2009 3:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont know where that idea came from but I think its false.
Go run sprints for 4 seconds(average length of a play) and then push a small truck for 2 seconds shed it and sprint for 2 seconds. Trust me the later is much tougher. You hit the fast twitch fibers(speed) and slow twitch(power). Its not that they dont get involved doing one or the other its justs this way blasts them both. Check out some of the things they do in offseason training with flipping tractor tires up hills, pulling these tires and countless others that escape me.
I dont know what is the best way to go about wearing a team out but I imagine a good mix of playing calling having the them on their heels. Im not advocating using one over the other. Dont get into a pattern of play calling. Having them guess wrong and having to stop momentum and change directions (lines) and accelerate again always did a number on me.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1000
It’s like running around the bases in baseball vs. getting caught in a pickle. Stopping and starting zaps energy bigtime. Don’t allow the D to flow to the ball.
I believe that early on in games, we should have the D on their heels and not be predictible. Mix up run vs. pass and mix up our 3 backs. Later in the game when energy has been depleted, then you can be a little more predictible and see who has the fresh legs. Rotating 3 backs vs. the D who plays 1, maybe 2 deep at certain posisitions will be an advantage.
by T Zig on Jul 21, 2009 12:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's difficult to "pound" a defense early
…because early on in the game they will often stop you for very short gains, leading to short drives (and often 3 and outs). This means that you get fewer carries, and it’s not really “pounding” if you only run 6-8 run plays in the first half.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 5:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And...
considering that JG likes to pass so often on either 1st or 2nd down, that wears down the DLineman even moreso because they are asked to pass rush early and often. Chasing around Felix would do the same. Then, you bring in Barber and beat them back.
It was frustrating that the coaches couldn’t see this last season. And we can’t just blame JG becuz Wade is the HC and should get all Sparano about using Barber as the closer.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 8:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Power early, speed late?
I don’t know the first thing about what strategy is best, but the Giants had good success running Jacobs early and Ward/Bradshaw late.
Congrats on having the new Cerberus of the NFC East.
Also, as a Giants fan I don’t think it’s a compliment to compare Felix to Tiki. We were all in love with Tiki’s stats when he was around, but frankly he just wasn’t a winner. He’s a Nomar Garciaparra, an Alex Rodriguez if you will.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jul 21, 2009 9:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember, Barber signed before the draft.
There was no guarantee at the time that the Cowboys would have either of those two backs. Barber was all the Cowboys had at the time of the deal.
"What you get when you put that #9 wit that #11? ...That's right 9-1-1!" - Roy Williams.
by Carl Shelton (GloryDayz88) on Jul 21, 2009 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I think they over paid a little but Barber held the ace at the time. Every one says RBs can be found anywhere. This is true but only if you have a good one on your roster. If you dont have one suddenly you cant find any.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barber signed after the draft, I thought
Everybody was talking about how Choice and Felix ended up giving Dallas leverage over the MB3 negotiations.
Epic Fail since 1985
by the red scare on Jul 21, 2009 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Careful with those numbers
28 runs is an awfully small sample size to make any valid prognosis. If you take out his longest runs of 62 and 33 yards (both outside), the averages come down significantly.
Now don’t get me wrong, I agree with Raf, and Felix is a homerun threat every time he touches the ball, but don’t go expecting these kinds of numbers over a full season, especially if he becomes a starter.
by One.Cool.Customer on Jul 21, 2009 2:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If you take away those two runs
He still has the best inside and outside averages.
Not disagreeing with the gist of your comment. However, (and this is just a feeling) I do think Felix has the talent of a Tiki Barber or a Brian Westbrook. His numbers will plummet of course with more carries, but that doesn’t mean he won’t be the most effective starter.
At any rate, both Felix and MB3 need their carries limited. I for one would rather see MB3 closing out games
by alienasia on Jul 21, 2009 3:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think even a superfan expects any RB to average 7.8 inside...
throughout a whole season. And that 16 is like a WRs YPC average.
The lame thing is that in those 6 games Felix had less than 30 carries. Were they saving him for a rainy day?
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 8:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree in principle, but you don't want to be quite as rigid as they were with Jones1/MB
I would start with a mix of backs so the D can’t get settled with one style. Granted it probably also could put our O-line off a little – although this is something they could practice for every week, unlike the D. If we go with a set pattern like with the previous Jones it just makes us more predictable and thus easier to gameplan.
If we are in the lead you would close with MB3. If behind you use Felix more.
If MB3 goes back to his “closer” role he is going to have to address his fumbling. He is the anti-Tiki – gone from virtually no fumbles in his career to too many last year.
"Where's Woody? - We need another Darren Woodson
by BoyfromOz on Jul 21, 2009 3:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
As long as FeJo is in more than half of the offensive plays
I’ll be happy
"We play to win the game" - Herm Edwards
by nicholas.rodriguez on Jul 21, 2009 3:59 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Football is not played inside a calculator.
KC Joyner and his numbers are fun to kick around, but they are not the be all end all. Especially when you consider how small the sample is on Felix.
If these numbers really meant that much, then every NFL coach should just pick up KC Joyners books and coach accordingly.
I still feel like Barber is the fastball and Jones is the curve. The fastball is the bread and butter that sets everything else up. Part of the reason the curve looks so great is because you dont see it 5 times in an at bat.
"What you get when you put that #9 wit that #11? ...That's right 9-1-1!" - Roy Williams.
by Carl Shelton (GloryDayz88) on Jul 21, 2009 6:11 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Carl?
I think every team has much more detailed numbers than KC Joyners. And they do use them to choose plays and coach.
by Musiccitynorm on Jul 21, 2009 7:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
small sample size, blah, blah, blah
Look, this is the same argument Felix Jones heard from the nay-sayers when he came out of Arkansas. He had one of the best career YPAs there. Second best, if I recall. And that was dismissed because he played in a junk offense, everybody keyed on McFadden, yada, yada, yada.
Yeah, it’s a small sample size, but it’s also another year where he’s posted YPAs off the charts.
When you’ve done this EVERY YEAR of your career, no matter the level, you’ve proven it.
And lots of NFL teams do buy his books, BTW.
You sound like Mookie Wilson back in ‘93, when he whined to Peter Gammons that, "you don’t play baseball with a slide rule."
Yeah, and within a few years, Gammons was spouting stats like he invented them, the Blue Jays hired Keith Law from Baseball Prospectus, Billy Beane began his Moneyball project in Oakland and Theo Epstein got his shot in Boston.
Just cause we’re early adopters of KC’s stats doesn’t make him, or us wrong.
by Rafael Vela on Jul 21, 2009 8:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too many variables, too much reliance on stats
Sample size does matter (doesn’t size always matter?), stats are often misleading, and coaches certainly know better what they are trying to do when using their personnel, though they make mistakes.
As for variables, Felix had Kosier and a healthy Flo, Barber was hurt and played with Brad (which certainly stunted his stats), etc., etc., ad infinitum. Further, a starter with more carries will almost always have a lower YPC than the change up back. Just look at the Julius Jones/Barber situation.
Could Felix be an effective starter, maybe. But statistics don’t portend success. They simply tell us what was. And what the Boys were was an offense replete with injuries.
I don’t think Felix is an everydown back. Then again, I think Barber is best in the closer role. What does that mean? Heck, I don’t know, but am really optimistic about the corps we have. I say use ’em all, damn the stats and starter labels.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Every down backs in the NFL don't exist anymore
Even A.P. shares time, but I will say that Felix definitely could handle 12-15 carries a game very easily.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Felix is bigger than Julius Jones ever was
He’s heavier than Emmitt Smith. He’s faster than either of those guys.
by Rafael Vela on Jul 21, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
I’m not against the idea. I just know that whenever a “change-of-pace” back has been put into a starting role, seldom do they prosper.
But I’ll give you the Tiki comparison. He was one. Westbrook is another (though his injuries speak volumes toward the downside).
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Brandon Jacobs
Priest Holmes, there are quite a few. It’s just people don’t think about them being a change of pace until they have been inserted.
I think Pierre Thomas has a chance to succeed as well.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pierre is a tough runner in the Choice mold. He will be a top back this year.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too much willful ignorance from the old school guys who fear stats
I thought baseball had a monopoly on sticking its head in the sand and avoiding new sources of knowledge.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't fear them
I just don’t buy them. Football, unlike Baseball is a team sport that statistical analysis just doesn’t show a causality.
Pittsburgh’s offense was abysmal. Rottin’burger was statistically inferior to Romo in every category, except wins (and championships).
Arizona didn’t deserve to be in the playoffs, and wouldn’t if they had been in any other division.
Brett Favre, Marino, Boomer, etc, etc, all out performed their Dallas counterparts…based on stats.
It takes a complete team effort and no single stat proves anything, portends anything, or is predictive of anything.
Now they are nice to use as indicators of why something may have occurred, but that still doesn’t tell the whole story.
And lastly, there’s no way, NO WAY, that last year means a rat’s ass to what will happen this year.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Roethlisberger's DVOA was superior to Romo's, wasn't it?
And it was certainly better in 2007, when he posted 32 and 11.
I think you’re just looking at the wrong stats. Or to quote Will Hunting— “You people. You read all these books and they’re the wrong f—-ing books.”
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So DVOA tells us what?
That a player had a better game, season, career?
OK.
I’ll take the better team…and a championship.
And really, who cares which player is “better”. He may or may not be better for our club. And even if he was…again, so what? Is there anything you, me, or GM Jerry can do about it?
And do the best collection of individual players mean that the team will succeed?
How do you like them apples?
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, I meant DPAR for ROmo and Roethlisberger.
DVOA is a TEAM STAT. And a predictive one. That analyzes teams and their potential for wins and losses.
There are meaningful stats out there for the game of football. The field has come miles in recent years. It’s clear not everyone is willing to embrace that.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 9:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Umm...
1. Pittsburgh also had a far superior defense. This is another thing. I hate… hate hate hate it when people attribute wins and championships to quarterbacks. You can win if you have a superior defense which the Steelers had.
2. That doesn’t prove anything, because like you said Arizona plays in an inferior division with teams that have even worse stats.
3. I think you are really confused. You are comparing players to teams. You can’t do that. You can only compare players to other players. You can, however, compare offenses to other offenses, and defenses to other defenses.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All that proves
is that individuals can be judged (to some degree) on stats and teams on outcomes. Makes sense since every player can only influence the outcome to some egree, but no one person by himself. The Steelers won on excellent defense. Dallas had a better defense and running game than Green bay, Miami and Cinci.
And no, ststas don’t predict anything, they simply provide one metric of past performance.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 22, 2009 6:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for explaining my point
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 22, 2009 9:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not yet...
If Felix is handed the starting job, his numbers will invariably fall back to earth, especially with outside runs. His limited body of work in the NFL does not warrant handing him the reigns just yet. If he is much better suited to starting than Barber, then his play in the preseason and first few games of the regular season will bear that out. I’d rather see him play his way into the starter’s role before we simply hand it to him based on some limited brilliance last year.
by Boundforbeach on Jul 21, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"fall back to earth"
when did that happen in Arkansas?
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes... fall back to earth
He had 16.2 yards per attempt on the outside. You don’t seriously expect this number to continue as his reps increase do you? Never happen.
by Boundforbeach on Jul 21, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He would have to win the starting position in TC like any other guy.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
too bad that is not always the case
like JuJo and Barber two years ago or Tank Johnson and Junior Siavii last year. A lot of politics goes into who is starting – sadly.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll happily take anything over 5
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who's claiming his averages won't drop?
The point is, he was better on every type of run than the other guys on the team last year. Didn’t matter if they were toss plays or isolation runs. His averages were better.
Even if they dropped, they’re still likely to be better.
That’s the point.
by Rafael Vela on Jul 21, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't buy the sample size argument
Felix set an NCAA record for ypc against top college talent. Then he continued his rampage in the NFL. At some point you have to say the kid is no fluke. Now I don’t expect him to get 9 ypc, but how many backs with 28 carries last year had his average? After a full season I’m hoping to see him somewhere over 5 ypc.
Nobody in football should be called a genius. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein.
Joe ThEEsman
by SB Six on Jul 21, 2009 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
For a long time superstition and faulty logic was used in baseball. Then Bill James came along and changed the way people thought about baseball in terms of stats. From those stats Bill James helped produce the Red Sox teams that were able to win the world series. 60 minutes did a piece on this.
Stats are almost always a good indicator of who is the best player. Football is not some magical sport that defies real world objectivity. I know people like to have some wispy supernatural perspective of the sport they love, but just like anything it can be subject to scientific analysis.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stats can not really tell you who the better performer is.
It can tell you who has the better chance of succeeding. Stats can tell you the likely hood of a player being able to succeed in different scenarios. They can’t tell you whether or not Felix Jones is going to break a 70 yarder every game. Although, that would be nice.
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
by GunsUp on Jul 21, 2009 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um I never said that
They can’t tell you whether or not Felix Jones is going to break a 70 yarder every game.
I said they could tell who is the better performer, and they can. Look at the QB ratings and everyone with a rating over 90 is a good QB. That is not a coincidence.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 11:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't sentence two contradict sentence one?
what is success, but a measure of performance?
by Rafael Vela on Jul 21, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even Bill James...
would not attempt to project the offensive production of a baseball player based on the equivalent of 28 at bats.
by Boundforbeach on Jul 21, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Felix had very similar stats at Arkansas playing in the SEC
it’s not like this is new to him.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed... he had great stats in college
And I’m really excited about him this year. But this isn’t college. I just think he should have to earn the starting job by his play on the field this year.
by Boundforbeach on Jul 21, 2009 11:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree completely
Football is most definitely a sport that defies statistics.
Having the best individual players does not a championship make. Who gives a flying rat’s behind which player is the best. Give me the best team.
And the only predictor is points scored vs. points surrendered.
The best argument is predictive analysis from one year to the next. Is it any wonder how a 1-15 team can win the division the next year? How ’bout the NFC South (worst-to-first every year). How ’bout the Cards last year?
There is not a single statistic that is even remotely predictive week-to-week, much less year-to-year. Statistics are for losers trying to explain the unexpainable.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I bet Turnover ratio
Is a big one.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Close, but no cigar
From memory,
Teams with +1 TO ratio had a ~60% chance of winning.
+3 or more only went to just under 80%
While a strong indicator, hardly predictive.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not predictive
But it is a statistic that matters. It sure as hell mattered for Dallas last year.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I got a prediction
If we turn the ballover (-10 or more) we will miss the playoffs.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody is talking about team production we are talking about who is the best Player
Statistics can most definitely tell who is the better player. That is my argument, but if you are so right, please give me some evidence because right now you are making conclusory statements.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Too many to list...
But here’s a few non-specific examples:
- # of tackles. A player on a losing team that has many more tackles than, say Ray Lewis.
- # of receptions. West Coast vs. Cowboys of the 90’s
- # of yards rushing.
- Defensive yards
- Offensive yards
In fact, most statistics are misleading. The only one that’s not is on the scoreboard.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 6:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are a lot of stats in baseball that are misleading too
RBIs. Stolen bases (without success percentage). Wins (without run support numbers or ERA). Etc. There are also a lot of stats that a lot of smart people like Bill James have worked on over the years that are tremendously valuable.
So I don’t think that pointing out that there are misleading stats in football proves your case that stats can’t be applied to the sport in meaningful ways. Metrics like DVOA are years behind the statistical analysis we see in baseball, but football is getting better every year, and I for one am excited about the opportunity to learn more about the sport, rather than frightened of new measures of performance and quick to shout them down and prove the Earth is flat.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 7:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please
Baseball is a series of one-on-one encounters (Pitcher vs Batter) that is played out over what seems like an eternity, giving a much better statistical sample. Further, (sans the juice), a player’s performance over several decades has a statistical normalilty (i.e., bell curve +/- std deviations).
Football simply does not lend itself to that kind of analysis.
How many times has a team dominated on the field, yet lost on the scoreboard? How many superstar-laden teams have fallen flat in the playoffs? Way too many variables.
However, there is one that is 100% accurate. Score more points, you’ll win.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 7:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Argh
Fighter, I can’t debate the existence of these stats with you if you have never heard of them. Go to FootballOutsiders.com. Poke around a little. It’s a wonderful place, I promise.
This is like me saying, “Man, there’s a baseball team in Washington now, have you seen them play?”, and you saying “No, there are baseball teams in lots of other cities, but there has never been one in Washington. There can’t be one there now.”
(I agree that if you look at which team scored more points after a game is over, it will show you who won. I don’t consider that a cutting edge statistic.)
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Been there, done that
Still don’t buy it.
Having done statistical analysis for the Joint Staff, I am quite familiar with statistical analysis. My problem with most of the DVOA statistics and such is that they “adjust” the average (null argument) moves. Further, it moves often to create the illusion that the correlation of statistics is predictive.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc…in other words correlation does not imply causation. It’s a causal fallacy.
Simply, cool stats don’t predict what will occur on a football field. They may tell us what happened, but hardly what will be.
Best statistic I’ve seen for predicting success is the vegas betting odds. They take all variables into account and put their money where their mouths are.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 10:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What on earth are you talking about
Your first two paragraphs there are nonsensical. DVOA “adjusts the average (null argument)”??? Maybe you mean something other than what you’re saying there, but no, they don’t.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 22, 2009 7:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's just say y'all (stats geeks) are Texas Sharpshooters
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 22, 2009 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good one
although I have to admit I had to look that one up.
by One.Cool.Customer on Jul 22, 2009 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get your viewpoint
But to me, you sound like Joe Morgan. Someone who doesn’t understand new information so he criticizes it or declaims it as meaningless.
Clearly we’re not going to make any headway here, though.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 22, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And if you don't think Vegas uses statistics like Bill James' Pythagorean predictions and Football Outsiders simulated seasons, you're crazy
Those models are most accurate predictions every single year of teams’ ultimate win/loss record. THey beat the ESPN experts every year.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 22, 2009 7:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You want to compare any stat
you can’t do that. You have to compare the right stats and use other stats to put them in perspective. Like for example if you want to determine who has the best rushing offense you have to compare rushing yards AND yards per carry together.
Defensive yards and offensive yards are actually great indicators of defensive and offensive performance.
Anyhow, you merely listed stats then made the conclusion that they were misleading… based on what? Where is the evidence that an offense with a lot of yards can be a bad offense? Where is the evidence that a QB with a rating over 90 his not a good QB? Show me.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 10:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The scoreboard is misleading too
if you are attempting to assess a single player. Eli Manning was not, is not and never will be as good as Tom Brady, and yet Eli’s team beat Tom’s team. That says virtually zero about Eli and Tom, and lots and lots about the Giants as a team and the Pats as a team.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 22, 2009 6:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again, my point
But even stats don’t tell whose the best player.
Was Favre or Young better QBs than Aikman? They sure as heck had better stats.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 22, 2009 9:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
I’m not really arguing the point, just trying to refine what people are saying. It’s kind of all over the map.
Stats are a good start for assessing a player, but obviously more goes into it because there are dependencies. Elway got remarkably better once he had a running game and a defense.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 22, 2009 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually Favre's career QB rating was 85.4 and Aikman is 81.6
So Favre was marginally better at first glance. However, Aikman made a name for himself in the playoffs. Aikman had a 88.3 QB rating and Favre had a 85.2 QB rating in the playoffs. Anyhow those differences are rather marginal and not significant. Each QB is about as good as the other and each is probably a little overrated.
Steve Young had great stats with a 96.8 career rating. Although his playoff rating was 85.8. So while Young was definitely a better regular season QB than Aikman, Aikman was marginally better in the playoffs.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 22, 2009 9:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
THAT'S MY POINT!
They did NOT have better stats! You’re using the wrong stats!
Aikman’s DPAR blows Favre’s out of the water. Yes, I agree that cumulative traditional stats are not always reliable, but you don’t have to use those anymore! Knowledge evolves, keep up.
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 22, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The last sentence was a paraphrase
Should have put it in quotes and attributed it. It was not to insult the stat hounds.
However, here are a few other quotables:
Statistics are like bikinis.
What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.
- Aaron Levenstein
Figures don’t lie, liars figure.
—Mark Twain
If you want to inspire confidence, give plenty of statistics.
It does not matter that they should be accurate, or even intelligible,
as long as there is enough of them.
- Lewis Carroll
And finally, one for Tim, Raf, One Cool, and BishopWest
Without data, all you are is just another person with an opinion.
—Unknown
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 8:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lol
and here’s another one for you:
"He uses statistics like a drunk man uses lampposts – for support rather than illumination" – Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
by One.Cool.Customer on Jul 22, 2009 4:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A statistician
goes bow hunting with two archers. A deer jumps out of the brush and hightails for the woods. Both archers shoot; one misses five feet to the right of the deer, the other misses five feet to the left.
“Got him!” shouts the statistician.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
by OskieOskie on Jul 22, 2009 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My favorite (if a little off color)
Statistics are like women; mirrors of purest virtue and truth, or like whores to use as one pleases. ~Theodor Billroth
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 22, 2009 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll take numbers-based analysis over anecdotal gut analysis like "fastball and curve" anyday
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 21, 2009 7:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stats
are way overblown in football. Fantasy football is all based on stats and is, well, fantasy.
Winning is what matters.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
by OskieOskie on Jul 21, 2009 8:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on what you are measuring
If you are comparing individual players, they don’t control winnning by themselves. They only control their performance, and even then only to a degree.
Of course winning is important, because it’s the focus of teams and the goal of the sport. But that doesn’t make it the only way, or even the best way, to judge an individual player. Marino, Moon, White, Kelly will always be better QBs than E Manning, Dilfer, Williams, B Johnson and on and on. Tomlinson is a better back than Parker or Maroney, and one of the best backs in history – Barry Sanders – has about nothing to show for it. Is he a loser too? There’s just not much logic behind “winning is what matters” when you talk about individuals.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 22, 2009 6:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not talking about
individual statistics. That’s fantasy football, coffee shop conversation.
I am talking about winning football teams.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
by OskieOskie on Jul 22, 2009 8:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No it's not fantasy football or coffee shop talk
I don’t do either. It’s a measure of an individuals performance, the only thing they personally have much control over. Winning is a team event. The Pats had better individuals, the Giants were a better team.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 22, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really don't think it matters who starts
so long as they both receive at least 10-12 touches per games minimum, either rushing or receiving.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 7:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
17 carries is not an indicator
that’s a change of pace back coming in and doing what he is supposed to in special situations. to be a fulltime starter and take the pounding and having defenses game plan for you is different. I think Choice’s numbers are better indicator given more carries and he played against some of the toughest defenses.
by CowboysFanatic on Jul 21, 2009 8:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
17 carries isn't an indicator of a change of pace back
Change of pace backs are lucky to get 10 carries a game.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 12:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
this it what worries me
He’s bulked up to 212 pounds this offseason
I hope it doesn’t take away his quickness and speed.
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 11:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't lose any sleep
That’s a very normal progression for a professional. I would be shocked if he lost either and not surprised if he was quicker and faster
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If it's muscle he won't lose any speed whatsoever
and actually it might even increase his speed.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you become too top heavy you can lose speed
by quincyyyyy on Jul 21, 2009 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1 there is a point of diminishing returns.
still I think Felix will be fine, he has the frame to carry the muscle. I dont think he should add much if any more. 215 should allow to keep his accelleration.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 12:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if he's only 212, he's definitely not too top heavy
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barber and Felix
Maybe I’m the only one, but the thing that I took away from this article was how poor Barber was at outside runs. I mean 2.6 yards per carry is absolutely way too low to justify 94 outside carries for Barber. This to me just enhances the perception that Garrett needs to reevaluate his play-calling and emphasize Barber’s strengths versus Felix’s strengths. I understand that every carry for Barber can’t be up the gut, but the ratio definitely needs to get slid in favor of inside runs.
If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.
by Cowboyfan729 on Jul 21, 2009 11:26 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Also, how many of those runse were designed to
go outside? Were some on those runs forced outside, because the middle was plugged up?
When did I become a Cowboy fan? When my mom told me I was.
by GunsUp on Jul 21, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see a little Mike Martz in Garrett
Martz was famous for not tinkering game plans because they were too elegant and he was too smart to have to do that. Garrett does not seem good at making in-game adjustments, and this stat about not playing to Barber’s strength illustrates this tendency
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
by Seanrude on Jul 21, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
It seemed like one of his strengths in the 2007season. In fact sports analysts were praising him for it. But last year it did seem like there was some difficulty in doing that since several players talked about being predictable, as well as a few opponents.
I wonder if it was more that he had run out of adjustments within the plays they had installed. That would make sense since opponents would have a full-year’s book on Garrett.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think your being a little hard on him.
2 years ago he lead a top notch explosive offense. Last year he was ham strung by injuries, young players, and expanding egos. You say he didnt make adjustments but maybe he didnt have the personel to pull it off. He went against many of the top DCs in the game last year. Even Washington whose team we give little respect had the #4 D last year. I know he has made mistakes but Im holding off on grading him til the end of this year. I dont think the final has been taken.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope I am wrong, and injuries did play a role, but it seemed last year that once defenses figured the O out, the same plays were run
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
by Seanrude on Jul 21, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Often the players,
not the scheme, give the play away to the defense.
After watching game film from the season, Dan Reeves (when he was almost a consultant) said he saw where one of our lineman was telegraphing the play.
If Jerry had sprung for the consultant contract, maybe we could have learned which OL and how.
Anyhow, don’t always blame the OC’s schemes for predictability.
Keep doing what you been doing, keep getting what you been getting.
by OskieOskie on Jul 21, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
for an offense
thats always had much more success in the second half, i think its tough to say that.
by foyesboys on Jul 21, 2009 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have been a big advocate of trading Barber
I think along w/ the great Felix stats, Raph has also given reason to use Choice over Barber. I love MB3 but I’d trade him for a quality DL, WR or OL. Not saying it’s possible but I’d dangle him out there if I was Jones.
Get rid of that huge contract and use 2 younger guys in the backfield.
by VA Dallas Fan on Jul 21, 2009 11:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
His contract is not tradable, he's the least tradable of all the backs
A sad reality of the NFL, the entire signing bonus hits the cap the year they are traded. That’s why it almost never happens. From a value standpoint, Choice is the most tradable.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
trading any of the three would be stupid
RB is a brutal position, you can never have enough good ones on the roster.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's one example of why you're not a GM
How can you say it’s stupid when you don’t know what you could get? Of course RB is a brutal position, it’s also apparently one of the easiest to pick up mid/low round picks every year who are very good players. Barber and Choice were both 4th rounders. The Cowboys have positions of need (like every team). With the constraints of a salary cap and roster spots, why would it be crazy to make a trade if you got equal value at a position of need.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and this is why you're not a GM
In case you haven’t heard, the NFL draft was in April, if you trade one of them now, there’s no way you can pick up a back as good.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that SHTG's point is that...
You really don’t have to have 3 good running backs.
I don’t necessarily think you trade any of the three for peanuts, but if someone offered Dallas a 1st rounder or an elite safety or something like that, I think you’d be nuts not to at least entertain the offer.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody trades for RBs
except Danny Snyder. They’re simply too easy to get.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I"m not sure about that
How many really good backs are ever available? I agree on one level with Terry’s point, I would need my socks blown off if I only had 2 good backs. It’s rare a team has 3 starting quality RB’s. Yes, they’re apparenlty easy to find at relatively low cost. But I have not heard of many Choice types being available, very young and very good. SD just Franchised Darren Sproles and Atlanta paid up for Michael Turner. I think if really good backs are available, teams are willing to pay up or trade for them.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take Fred Taylor
NE got him free.
There are still several decent vets out there.
The problem lies in the average life of a RB. Most are only good for 4-5 years, which is the length of most rookie contracts. There are exceptions, but few are given monster paydays anymore.
During the entire 90’s, the Cowboys thought the same for LBs. Pittsburgh still does. They are the 2 positions that just don’t get the love. BTW, before you start putting up Ware & Co., 3-4 OLBs are treated like DEs.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 6:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has never been the healtiest of guys when he was young. Free might be too much
if he keeps a young promising guy off of the team.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 6:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand there's always a market for decent end of their career RB's
That’s not what I’m talking about. None of Dallas’ 3 fit that description.
I don’t dispute your premise; you can definately find serviceable, even decent RB’s on the cheap. I made that point above. I just think the market for the next grade up that has low mileage is higher than you think. I think T. Choice would generate a lot of interest, maybe a team with an abundance of good young offensive lineman for example.
by StillHateTheGiants on Jul 21, 2009 7:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm all for it.
I just don’t see it. When a starting QB only gets you a 2nd round pick…
The outside guys (LT, DE, WR, and CB) are the only positions that continually get a big return. However, come TC, if a team gets decimated at the position and has a plethora of OL, then by all means make the trade.
It's not personal, it's just business
by Fighter15 on Jul 21, 2009 7:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Choice would be the one I would least want to trade.
He’s what provides stability at the RB position for this team. While Garrett has to figure out what to do with Barber or how to use Felix, he can pop Choice in there at any time, in any situation. He’s the steady.
Only a young, top-notch LT would get my attention. And still, I’d hesitate if I were Mr.Jones.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
REALLY!!!!
Fleix Jones has 30 carries and 2 receptions in his NFL career….think about that, and then think about that some more. and then retract your statement.
MB3 is the heart of this team look at the 2nd Washington game alst year. He is 1 year removed from scoring 14 TD’s. He was hurt last year. Would you actually trade MB3???
Let’s not forget about Julius Jones who had a great first year and then sucked…. you never know in this league. MB3 has been consistent and always gives it his all.
How quickly we forget just had good he was a year ago, and how good he has been when healthy. IF you actually think Felix will average anywhere close to 8.9 yards per carry next year your crazy… let’s keep MB3 and let’s see how he plays when healthy, and then let’s remember he’s the heart of our offense, and a very very good player.
Texas Stadium has a hole in the roof so God can watch his favorite team play football.
by iCowboy on Jul 21, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What was he playing at last year
if he is at 212 this year out of curiosity. Those averages are on 28 runs so keep that in mind as well. Something else to consider also. He did this same thing in college. He averaged 10 yards/rush but if you increase his load this might go down.
I want 20 touches/game for right now. 5 kickoffs and 15 rushes/catches. If you assume Marion gets most of the work in the 4th, he would average approx. 7 touches/qtr.
by cow_fanatic on Jul 21, 2009 12:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He did
average 10 yds per carry in College (but that’s college), and on 28 carries he averaged 8.9, but, 28 carries = 1 – 1/4 game worth of carries for a starting back. Look I love felix but 8.9 in just not happening over the course of the entire year. The best Barry sanders ever did in a year was 6.1 yds per carry (’97), which is in itself insane. If felix can be around 6 that would be great. I say that 15 touches per game at least is where he should be at. But, MB3 will still be a very important part of this offense.
also I sincerely hope Felix doesnt get 5 kickoffs a game. If that happens, I don’t think we win many games.
Texas Stadium has a hole in the roof so God can watch his favorite team play football.
by iCowboy on Jul 21, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed I sincerely hope Felix doesnt get 5 kickoffs a game
But if you assume the defense averages 17 pts/game against which is a good avg, there’s 4 of your kickoffs a game
by cow_fanatic on Jul 21, 2009 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A really ripped
120.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His draft combine profile has him at 200.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think for now
while Barber is still young, we should keep Felix in a Reggie Bush style role. Running, catching, returning kicks. Then in 2 years we move Felix to starter and have Barber in a Jerome Bettis style role. Felix would be 24 years and have a lot of tread left on his tires. That would be my plan.
If Felix became the starter this year I would be perfectly fine with that, it’s just that he’s young and I’d prefer to have him contribute for 8 years as opposed to 4-5. Especially when we have a player like Marion Barber right now. It’s not like he’s some scrub, he’s a monster.
by DoomsdayD75 on Jul 21, 2009 2:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
you can't pay two backs monster contracts
When Felix’s contract runs out, you have to pick between the two and I’d take Felix in another 3 years hands down.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on Jul 21, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think by him saying Felix takes over starting/bigger role in 2-3 years
is to let MBIII go and give Felix the big money.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well you would hope he would restructure.
If he doesn’t they can get rid of him and resign Choice.
by DoomsdayD75 on Jul 21, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, I keep leaving him out but he is too good.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 4:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Man, you know the masses are craving some football when a RB thread generates over 120 comments. I can’t wait for training camp to start.
If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.
by Cowboyfan729 on Jul 21, 2009 2:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
EVERYBODY LISTEN UP
Nobody claimed that Felix could average 8.9 for the rest of his career or even next season, so stfu about that.
Barber is not tradeable, and once again Jerry made a mistake by not letting him play under his RFA tender. Why does Dallas have to be the only team that won’t let their players just play out their contracts? Seriously, he resigned TO, RW1, Ellis (more gtd $$), etc. Barber is an excellent RB, but not worth what he’s getting paid.
Felix/Choice would be a hell of a (cheap) duo, but we’re stuck with Marion for at least 2 more seasons. Sure is nice when one of the only things you have to argue about is how to best use your THREE stud RBs.
:)
by ChrisRichey on Jul 21, 2009 2:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Terry and Cowboyfan729
were talking in the back of the room. I think they should get detention.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
MBIII brings more to the table than just yards.
He is the consumate pro. He is a closer. He provides this team with a toughness that is sorely lacking. He is the best at blitz pickup and blocking. I think we overpaid but not enough to be an issue. i think he also makes Felix better and more value. Felix would have to carry a much bigger load and he seems to thrive in a tandum. Lets enjoy the ride.
Our salary cap is fine. Its been well managed. Even the money with Ware isnt a issue. Its the length of the contract. Too many of us older fan have a salary cap hangover from the 90s.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 2:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah...
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with Felix starting, but I don’t get the Marion Barber hate.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 21, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone always like shiny new things to talk about......
it’s like Witten/Bennett. Some on here give the impression that M. Bennett is HOF material when he isn’t even a starter. I’d venture to say some would say get rid of Witten for Bennett right now. Agree? Not trying to start an argument but a lot of fans have tunnel vision and like new toys to play with.
by texstar on Jul 21, 2009 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Indeed...let's enjoy the ride.
Barber can still take over games. When he sparks up the offense and bench by headbutting and punching some hated defender who is just trying to push him out of bounds is invaluable.
This offense needs that punch, that toughness, that gut this year. The NFC South and all 3 of our rivals will try to run our D into the ground. The best counter to that is to do it right back.
MB3 cannot be traded.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 3:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
A problem nobody is mentioning is that having 3 good backs could be counterproductive as none get a chance to get into the "Flow" of the game
If Garrett is too concerned w/ ‘touches’ and is constantly pulling these guys in and out for series, that can hurt.
“Flow” isn’t just an expression, I think running backs need a chance to carry and get a feel and actual vision of their blockers and the other team’s D matching up, where guys on the other side are moving and closing gaps, the speed, etc. So that as the game goes on they start to see tendencies and gaps better and better. A RB may get stuffed on a play but learn from that (esp. if the coaches are doing their jobs during the game) to see how it would have opened up, and then to take advantage of that next time. I’m not too sure about RB’s splitting carries too much. Two guys, yes, but not 3, unless that 3rd guy is like a straight ahead FB type of guy who just rams through (like Baltimore has, bad memory)
by Realist Larry on Jul 21, 2009 5:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
+1 its going to be tough to keep them all happy.
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. Gen. George Patton
by squidlo97 on Jul 21, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But
Some guys need it more than others. MBIII seemed to do well no matter how and when he came in for JJ.
It’ll be interesting fo shore.
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 21, 2009 6:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I always felt Julius Jones was one of those guys
that he needed 20 carries to really get into the game, and didn’t do well sharing.
Barber did OK w/ it also, that’s true.
I just think there’s a physical aspect to it besides the mental one.
by Realist Larry on Jul 21, 2009 6:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Choice could be the one who most needs some "Flow".
Barber and Felix have been used to sharing the load and seem to do just fine when inserted randomly.
Shoulda been Hawkins.
by Aaron Novinger on Jul 21, 2009 7:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
MBIII is not a head case
He doesn’t ask for the spotlight and has anyone heard grumblings from him about needing more carries? He is the consummate professional and seems to be the guy that will do what he is asked to do to win. That is not only a luxury but deserving of a contract he was given. I think he knows deep down he is not one to be on top of his game for 10 years because of the punishment he takes and dishes out. Don’t forget about the RB who led the NFC in receptions last year, MBIII
Noone should be asking to trade MBIII. He is ours and we have 2 2nd year running backs that aren’t due for a raise for a while. Ask the Giants how valuable that problem is to have 3 RBs with ability and not being able to keep them all
by cow_fanatic on Jul 21, 2009 8:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
...and Romo drives the bus again.
Isn’t it ironic that all Tuna said and did re: running backs was almost exactly what all above comments are saying – that is, give the ball to the three-headed monster backfield, control the ball, and Romo drives the bus – so here we are…back to square one, boys! Phenomenal post, Raf; you are the best at what you do.
"The Most Dangerous Man in the world is the one with nothing to lose"
by SaratogaRacing on Jul 21, 2009 9:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I hope Felix Jones starts
Dallas would always regret not attempting him as a starter. His ability is amazing
by AustonianAggie on Jul 21, 2009 10:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Sample size???
Felix Jones is a terrific RB with loads of talent. However, the different in carries between FJ and Barber can’t be ignored… Also, you have to keep in mind that Barber was going up against defenses when they were fresh. FJ typically came into games later when he was fresh (because he hardly carried the ball) and the defenses were worn down (from Barber running it down their throats). I think that FJ would be better coming off the bench because of his breakway speed. I do agree that we need to find more ways to get him the ball though.
by Notorious623 on Jul 22, 2009 9:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If you could cross the dna of bo jackson and b.sanders, you would get felix, in my humble opine.
My projected stats for “the cat”,provided he stays healthy,of course.
Rushing yards: 1650
Receiving yds: 1350
Touchdowns, rushing 17, receiving 8, st returns 4
Yes, we’re talking 3000 total yds and nearly Thirty tds. He’s that good. I just hope he can stay healthy and prove me(impressed by him since he was a razorback) right.
Anybody know the old charley pride song, “Is anybody going to san antone?”
Next week can’t get here fast enough people, this off-season has been the longest in my entire memory of being a cowboys fan, which dates back to my childhood in the ’70’s.
Peace.
by cypher on Jul 22, 2009 1:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I hope you are right, but jeez louise those are some huge numbers.
Lifetime Cowboys Fan from the Swamps of Jersey
by Seanrude on Jul 22, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
Larry Allen benched 700 pounds. That is Leonard Davis times two.
by Tim Wilson on Jul 22, 2009 4:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm all for high expectations.
But I’d bet my left testicle that Felix Jones will never have 3000 combined yards.
I possibly might make that for anyone, that is would be crazy. That would mean he’d average damn near 190 yards a game.
by The Immortal Iron Fist AKA AFB on Jul 23, 2009 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember
This cautionary tale when you make statements like that…
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig loves it.
by dunkman on Jul 23, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















