Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Had a thought about Murray
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
What if he has been having bad sport science load numbers as a result of the overuse last year?

What if we were catching something that is a significant injury risk had we not rested him?

The more I think of it, I think his numbers are wacky and they are holding him back.

A little surprised it's gone on for almost two weeks but maybe that's what the sports numbers dictate.

Hopefully his numbers get better soon!!
mcnabbulous
I'm nearly certain that's it. Maybe not numbers per se, but his workload last year.
Reality Fan
God I can't wait for the season to start so this fantasy land bullshit about the number of carries he had is put to rest...

He is a young RB with no significant leg injuries....he is not rundown...he has had one season where he had a lot of carries and the horseshit about a heavy workload has been generally debunked in previous posts..

Terrell Davis is a great example....

He had 3 consecutive years with the following:

1996 359 carries and 43 rec. 1629/334
1997 481 carries and 50 rec. 2334/325

How did he follow that up?

1998 470 carries and 29 rec. 2476/286

The following year he tore his ACL and MCL early in game 4 making a tackle after an interception.....a death sentence for a RB at that time

He was never the same....so relax....most of the guys who had that many carries and then faded weere the result of catastrophic or nagging injury caused by circumstance or ignorance(see Larry Johnson)

I know you love to see the dark side but I hate to dig up all the proof a 2nd time to show you how silly this is in relation to Murray.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Aug 13 2015, 10:23 PM) *
God I can't wait for the season to start so this fantasy land bullshit about the number of carries he had is put to rest...

He is a young RB with no significant leg injuries....he is not rundown...he has had one season where he had a lot of carries and the horseshit about a heavy workload has been generally debunked in previous posts..

Terrell Davis is a great example....

He had 3 consecutive years with the following:

1996 359 carries and 43 rec. 1629/334
1997 481 carries and 50 rec. 2334/325

How did he follow that up?

1998 470 carries and 29 rec. 2476/286

The following year he tore his ACL and MCL early in game 4 making a tackle after an interception.....a death sentence for a RB at that time

He was never the same....so relax....most of the guys who had that many carries and then faded weere the result of catastrophic or nagging injury caused by circumstance or ignorance(see Larry Johnson)

I know you love to see the dark side but I hate to dig up all the proof a 2nd time to show you how silly this is in relation to Murray.


Not really a dark side.

I was saying that if his numbers are down, our sports science may be preventing some bad shit from happening.

I mean really. The camp practices are about 90 minutes with no tackling.

They must be resting him for a reason. What has he fully participated in three practices in two weeks?

I'm OK with it if it works.

Sam, however, needs to show he can get back in the game time groove. Murray had his game time groove all last year.
mcnabbulous
Those nagging injuries that RF writes off are often a direct result of the excessive workload these guys have just dealt with.

There are far more examples of guys struggling after a 400 carry season than the alternative. Additionally, the guys that are pounding on Demarco Murray are bigger, faster and stronger than the guys from 17 years ago.

It's a serious concern and Chip is smart to minimize his contact at this point in the year.
Joegrane
I agree they are wise to give him a light camp. With three good backs, it is not that he will need unusual endurance during the season.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 14 2015, 10:08 AM) *
There are far more examples of guys struggling after a 400 carry season than the alternative. Additionally, the guys that are pounding on Demarco Murray are bigger, faster and stronger than the guys from 17 years ago.

It's a serious concern and Chip is smart to minimize his contact at this point in the year.


QUOTE
Those nagging injuries that RF writes off are often a direct result of the excessive workload these guys have just dealt with


I agree with the sports science on this. Some of the injuries have dehydration or poor nutrition as a contributing factor. You need to give the body the fuel it needs for performance and repair processes. It needs appropriate chemicals for liver detox. We are chemical factories.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 14 2015, 10:08 AM) *
Those nagging injuries that RF writes off are often a direct result of the excessive workload these guys have just dealt with.

There are far more examples of guys struggling after a 400 carry season than the alternative. Additionally, the guys that are pounding on Demarco Murray are bigger, faster and stronger than the guys from 17 years ago.

It's a serious concern and Chip is smart to minimize his contact at this point in the year.


A good number of them are torn ACLs and torn MCLs, are you saying that they are a result of 400 carries? If so explain Bradford for one or the countless number of torn ACLs across the league. Simply not true.
1977
I agree the players are bigger and faster but the medical science supporting players like Murray is so advanced compared to what many of the players who declined enjoyed at the time. I will gladly provide the proof once again if needed, I did it before in another post.

Plenty of RBs declined without 400 carries in single season.

And there are not far more examples of players naturally declining after 400 carries in the absence of a catastrophic injury.....simply because there are not that many guys who have 400 carries in a season.

And for another example of a RB with a ton of use please refer to Adrian Peterson...2100 carries over 7 years

Walter Payton had 385 carries in 1979...and went on to rush for over 1000 yds 7 more times after that including 427 carries in 1984...and how did he follow that up? He had 388 carries in 1985 for 1737 yds.

Shall I go on...there are more.

Ced83
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Aug 13 2015, 07:48 PM) *
What if he has been having bad sport science load numbers as a result of the overuse last year?

What if we were catching something that is a significant injury risk had we not rested him?

The more I think of it, I think his numbers are wacky and they are holding him back.

A little surprised it's gone on for almost two weeks but maybe that's what the sports numbers dictate.

Hopefully his numbers get better soon!!

Signing Murray was a mistake IMO. He's injury prone and he had a lot of carries last year. But Chip made his bed now he has to lay in it. I predict he'll be back in college in a few years good riddance.
xsv
QUOTE (Ced83 @ Aug 14 2015, 12:05 PM) *
Signing Murray was a mistake IMO. He's injury prone and he had a lot of carries last year. But Chip made his bed now he has to lay in it. I predict he'll be back in college in a few years good riddance.


laugh.gif laugh.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Aug 14 2015, 10:48 AM) *
A good number of them are torn ACLs and torn MCLs, are you saying that they are a result of 400 carries? If so explain Bradford for one or the countless number of torn ACLs across the league. Simply not true.

And a good number of them aren't. What's your point?


QUOTE
I agree the players are bigger and faster but the medical science supporting players like Murray is so advanced compared to what many of the players who declined enjoyed at the time. I will gladly provide the proof once again if needed, I did it before in another post.

Please do, but I can go ahead and provide statistical evidence of non ACL related regression.

QUOTE
Plenty of RBs declined without 400 carries in single season.

Sure, but the drop-off is usually pretty significant after the heavy carry seasons. And not just 400 carries.

QUOTE
And there are not far more examples of players naturally declining after 400 carries in the absence of a catastrophic injury.....simply because there are not that many guys who have 400 carries in a season.

I would agree the sample size is small, but guys like Chris Johnson, MJD, Larry Johnson are pretty strong examples.

QUOTE
And for another example of a RB with a ton of use please refer to Adrian Peterson...2100 carries over 7 years

Yes, AP is definitely a freak. He also had drop-offs after in production in the years after his heaviest workloads.

QUOTE
Walter Payton had 385 carries in 1979...and went on to rush for over 1000 yds 7 more times after that including 427 carries in 1984...and how did he follow that up? He had 388 carries in 1985 for 1737 yds.

Shall I go on...there are more.

If you want to continue bringing up guys from the 70's, 80's and 90's -- go right ahead. But you'll basically be talking to yourself.

In the modern NFL, guys have proven that a heavy workload takes its toll like never before.

Johnson
Jones-Drew
Shady
Jamal Lewis
Michael Turner
Steven Jackson
Arian Foster

All of them had major dips in YPC or nagging injuries after their ~350 carry seasons. But yeah, Jim Brown handled it okay.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 14 2015, 12:14 PM) *
And a good number of them aren't. What's your point?



Please do, but I can go ahead and provide statistical evidence of non ACL related regression.


Sure, but the drop-off is usually pretty significant after the heavy carry seasons. And not just 400 carries.


I would agree the sample size is small, but guys like Chris Johnson, MJD, Larry Johnson are pretty strong examples.


Yes, AP is definitely a freak. He also had drop-offs after in production in the years after his heaviest workloads.


If you want to continue bringing up guys from the 70's, 80's and 90's -- go right ahead. But you'll basically be talking to yourself.

In the modern NFL, guys have proven that a heavy workload takes its toll like never before.

Johnson
Jones-Drew
Shady
Jamal Lewis
Michael Turner
Steven Jackson
Arian Foster

All of them had major dips in YPC or nagging injuries after their ~350 carry seasons. But yeah, Jim Brown handled it okay.



So the sample size is small but lets exclude the guys that make your point moot?

Larry Johnson did not drop off because of injury so much as he did because he was an idiot......He suffered a foot injury the following season.....and the year after that he was on pace for 1600 yards before he was suspended from the league and never gave a shit again

Michael Turner? A fire plug to be sure....he he had 372 carries in his 5 year and got hurt the next year on his way to another 1000 yard season (871 yds in 11 games) and then had 2 more 1000 yard seasons

Ricky Williams 383 carries followed by 392 carries

Maurice Jones Drew was his own worst enemy....he fell off the table in 2012 because he missed the entire TC and preseason holding out and paid the price coming in out of shape.

Jamal Lewis rushed for over 1000 yards 4 of his last 6 seasons after his one heavy year even when sharing carries with Mike Anderson in 2006. His career was marred by animosity from the Ravens not signing him to big money.

Steven Jackson is a stupid example for several reasons....he had one season, his third, where he rushed 346 times. He was not given as many carries in any other year and then he rushed for over 1000 yards for the next 6 years.

Arian Foster in another silly example....his one poor season was caused by a bulging disc in his back in the offseason....my father has the same thing and never had a 350 carry season in the NFL...his started to bother him when he was 23. In the 8 games he was able to play he averaged 4.5 yards per carry....and then rushed for 1200 yards the next year after getting taken care of.

And Shady? never had a heavy load in the upper 300s but still followed up 1600 yards with 1300 yards.....more because of his style vs. defensive adjustments but saying his workload caused a fall off above a 1000 yards is silly....defenses adjust and he still had 1300 yards....and is still playing...

and the beat goes on.....all RBs decline at some point but if a guy rushed for 1500 yards and then rushes for 1200 yards the next 3 years, that is not drop off as much as scheme and adjustment....

I can provide more examples.....
mcnabbulous
I didn't realize that I was dealing with someone that considers 1000 rushing yards in a season some relevant milestone. I won't waste my time anymore.
Reality Fan
great idea......I guess I am as dumb as just about every analyst that follows the game but hey...you asked and I provided proof.....

I did not realize we were using some other metric created by you.

I forgot who I was answering.....anything that makes your point moot is silly....even though I used your own examples...you should take solace in the fact that of your examples 1 was usable.

And by the way....1000 yards is was gets RBs paid....
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Aug 14 2015, 12:46 PM) *
great idea......I guess I am as dumb as just about every analyst that follows the game but hey...you asked and I provided proof.....

I did not realize we were using some other metric created by you.

I forgot who I was answering.....anything that makes your point moot is silly....even though I used your own examples...you should take solace in the fact that of your examples 1 was usable.

And by the way....1000 yards is was gets RBs paid....

Welp, Chip sure as hell thinks that Murray's workload last year is relevant. Are you smarter than Chip? That's right, you're smarter than everyone!

QUOTE
“He’s coming along," Kelly said. "He’s done a lot of different things. Trying to get his acclimiated. He also carried the ball more than anybody in the NFL last year. We’re just trying to integrate him into what we’re doing.”

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/...1EszPx7Ztjeb.99

I think YPC is more relevant than 1000 yards. When a guy sees a significant dip in YPC, I think it's cause for concern.

1000 yards is a worthless round number. It translates to 62.5 yards per game.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 14 2015, 05:49 PM) *
1000 yards is a worthless round number. It translates to 62.5 yards per game.



The 1,000 yard mark is a holdover from when there were 14 game seasons. It was never adjusted upward with the 2 additional games.
Like you said, it is a worthless round number.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 14 2015, 01:49 PM) *
Welp, Chip sure as hell thinks that Murray's workload last year is relevant. Are you smarter than Chip? That's right, you're smarter than everyone!


Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/...1EszPx7Ztjeb.99

I think YPC is more relevant than 1000 yards. When a guy sees a significant dip in YPC, I think it's cause for concern.

1000 yards is a worthless round number. It translates to 62.5 yards per game.


And would you like me to make you look like an idiot again using your own examples and now your 2nd metric?

Steven Jackson? over 4 ypc in 5 of the next 8 years including the 4.4 he had in his "heavy year

MJD? The next year he was averaging more at 4.8 ypc before he got hurt

Michael Turner? Was averaging 4.9 the next year before he got hurt and the following 2 years averaged over 4 ypc including 2 years later when he matched the 4.5 of his "heavy" year.
Shady still averaged 4.2 the same as he did the year before his "heavy" year..

Jamal Lewis was the only guy who dropped below 4 ypc but that was as much Baltimore's offense as it was Lewis..

Am I smarter than Chip? Hell no...I agree with him resting Murray...and Bradford...

What makes me laugh is you type shit like you are some football oracle and expect everyone to just take your word for it while it apparent that you don't look up anything to see if you know what the hell you are talking about. When someone uses those pesky little things called facts you get all bitchy. I did nothing more than refute your assertion by providing the facts about the very examples you used.

So no, I don't know more than everybody...that is why I look things up...try it some time....or just keep on believing you know something about football....like Gino Smith....



lots of reference material out there...it isn't hard....
mcnabbulous
Chris Johnson had a significant drop in YPC and was really never the same guy again.

MJD averaged 4.8 over a whopping 86 carries. Take away the 59 yard long and he averaged 4.17 on the rest.

Shady was clearly not himself last year. He averaged the same as he did in 2012...when he was hurt.

4.0 is a shitty YPC. I'm not sure why you're using that as some relevant standard. 4.5 is where the best guys should be, at minimum. 5.0 is where the best guys are at the top of their game.

I don't think YPC is some end all, be all stat. I think it's a measurable, as well as nagging injuries that contribute to these guys routinely missing time the next year. I also think some guys are slightly better equipped to handle it. Michael Turner can take a bigger pounding than Shady. Adrian Peterson can handle it more than Chris Johnson.

Demarco had a huge workload last year. Not many guys have sustained that two years in a row. Usually their body catches up to them, whether it is a steep decline in production or simply not making it through the season.

I also never said it was impossible. Tomlinson had about as good of a career as possible despite being overused on a yearly basis. Statistically though, the cases of guys having back to back huge workloads is small.

Usually it takes a guy 2 years to recover from it. Something I've said time and time again.


Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 14 2015, 11:19 PM) *
Chris Johnson had a significant drop in YPC and was really never the same guy again.

It was his 2nd year...and the following year he averaged 4.3 ypc....name another feature RB RB who averaged over 5 ypc for multiple seasons? Barry Sanders comes to mind as one of the few but you don't want to go there...he went from 5.1 to 4.5 to 4.3....and back up to 5.1....go figure...surely he had to be in decline. The fact is there are few feature RBs who averaged 5 ypc for multiple seasons....by the way...Johnson had 4 consecutive 1000 yard seasons after his 2nd year...I know you don't think 1000 yards means anything but you are one of the few...I guess 1000 yds rec. is a meaningless stat as well...

MJD averaged 4.8 over a whopping 86 carries. Take away the 59 yard long and he averaged 4.17 on the rest.



I like this one......you can say that about any RB....Chris Johnson is a great example....a good portion of his 2000 yards were ripped off in huge chunks...for example...in his biggest game..338 yds...he cover 141 in 2 carries....his 22 other carries got him 87 yards...
He also was a guy who held out of TC the year he got hurt..he broke a bone in his foot..again..hardly an injury from over use...just bad luck...he was on pace to have his best YPC that year...that bone in his foot was his ticket out of the NFL.



Shady was clearly not himself last year. He averaged the same as he did in 2012...when he was hurt.

4.0 is a shitty YPC. I'm not sure why you're using that as some relevant standard. 4.5 is where the best guys should be, at minimum. 5.0 is where the best guys are at the top of their game.

Again...you spout this like it is gospel rather than conjecture on your part...was Emmit Smith an average RB? Eric Dickerson? each did it once...Smith only eclipsed 4.3 ypc 3 times....dickerson was all over the place from 4.1 to 4.6. In his 8 full years AP has done it twice....twice! As I pointed out earlier...Sanders is the exception but again..he kills your argument anyway...Terrell Davis...once...Barber did it 3 times in 10 years...Edgerrin James never did it but you don't want to use him because he really fucks up your argument with both carries and yards..look at 2004 to 2007

I don't think YPC is some end all, be all stat. I think it's a measurable, as well as nagging injuries that contribute to these guys routinely missing time the next year. I also think some guys are slightly better equipped to handle it. Michael Turner can take a bigger pounding than Shady. Adrian Peterson can handle it more than Chris Johnson.

There is another factor that plays into this as well.....the scheme and the OC....take Johnson for example...Palmer came in as his OC and was eventually fired in Johnson's down year....Johnson hated his system from the start..I think he had 11 carries in their first game.

Demarco had a huge workload last year. Not many guys have sustained that two years in a row. Usually their body catches up to them, whether it is a steep decline in production or simply not making it through the season.

I also never said it was impossible. Tomlinson had about as good of a career as possible despite being overused on a yearly basis. Statistically though, the cases of guys having back to back huge workloads is small.

Usually it takes a guy 2 years to recover from it. Something I've said time and time again.

Don't get me wrong...I think resting Murray can't hurt...the position is fickle...there are loads of RBs who lose a step despite not being overused so overuse can be a factor....my only contention...one I have backed up with lots of examples is that it is not even close to an unwritten rule...it was a media concoction that the facts really don't support all that well. Many great backs have had long careers with heavy use. It is like any other position...and the same reason that the average career is so short...you never know what can happen...those players that are lucky enough to avoid broken bones, back issues and torn tendons have long careers at their positions...
nephillymike
Just an outside observation of this back and forth.

There's something called "regression towards the mean" in statistics that is very simple that may explain much of what you guys are arguing about.

If a population has an mean ypc of 4.2, that over time, those above that in one year, or below that in one year, will regress to become closer to that mean.

Just sayin'.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Aug 15 2015, 05:47 AM) *
Just an outside observation of this back and forth.

There's something called "regression towards the mean" in statistics that is very simple that may explain much of what you guys are arguing about.

If a population has an mean ypc of 4.2, that over time, those above that in one year, or below that in one year, will regress to become closer to that mean.

Just sayin'.

Totally agree. 4.2 is the mean. Meaning that the best guys are better than that. Emmit Smith sure was. Had averaged 4.46 ypc through 1995 when he rushed 451 times (including the playoffs).

Never had a higher ypc than 4.2 after that. Sure he had a long, great career - but he wasn't the same guy. It's almost like he's trying to make my point for me.

I really don't give a shit if RF wants to deny this reality. It's irresponsible to run a guy 350+ times in a season. It's even more so to expect to do the same two years in a row.

Then again, we're talking about a guy who can't see the difference between how one big run will skew the average of 86 carries more so than a number of long runs over the course of a 370+ carry season.

Adrian Peterson's career average is 5.0. At his worst, 4.4. In fact - his two lowest ypc seasons came immediately following his two heaviest workload seasons. Coincidence? RF probably thinks so, but he's also a blowhard.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 15 2015, 07:40 AM) *
Totally agree. 4.2 is the mean. Meaning that the best guys are better than that. Emmit Smith sure was. Had averaged 4.46 ypc through 1995 when he rushed 451 times (including the playoffs).

Never had a higher ypc than 4.2 after that. Sure he had a long, great career - but he wasn't the same guy. It's almost like he's trying to make my point for me.

I really don't give a shit if RF wants to deny this reality. It's irresponsible to run a guy 350+ times in a season. It's even more so to expect to do the same two years in a row.

Then again, we're talking about a guy who can't see the difference between how one big run will skew the average of 86 carries more so than a number of long runs over the course of a 370+ carry season.

Adrian Peterson's career average is 5.0. At his worst, 4.4. In fact - his two lowest ypc seasons came immediately following his two heaviest workload seasons. Coincidence? RF probably thinks so, but he's also a blowhard.


I must be honest....I posted a longer response but realized it is foolish and childish to engage in the insult game with you I have used facts to refute your contentions and you use insults and conjecture which is generally unsupported by facts. I can't debate that. No matter what evidence is given you can't seem to understand. I do not suggest every back does not regress....I merely pointed out that many great backs had good or better seasons after heavy use. You chose examples and I used those examples to make my point

[b(by the way....AP's 6 ypc came 4 years AFTER his 383 carry season...remember......the original contentious number...skewing his career YPC
[/b]

and Mikey used 4.2 as an example....it was not the actual number....too funny






D Rock
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Aug 15 2015, 02:48 PM) *
I must be honest....I posted a longer response but realized it is foolish and childish to engage in the insult game with you I have used facts to refute your contentions and you use insults and conjecture which is generally unsupported by facts. I can't debate that. No matter what evidence is given you can't seem to understand. I do not suggest every back does not regress....I merely pointed out that many great backs had good or better seasons after heavy use. You chose examples and I used those examples to make my point

[b(by the way....AP's 6 ypc came 4 years AFTER his 383 carry season...remember......the original contentious number...skewing his career YPC
[/b]

and Mikey used 4.2 as an example....it was not the actual number....too funny

Actually, he used quite a few facts and recent historical references. You have a career long habit here of presenting opinion as fact. Honestly, I'd prefer the childish insulting post to this non response.

Just sayin
Reality Fan
QUOTE (D Rock @ Aug 15 2015, 11:26 AM) *
Actually, he used quite a few facts and recent historical references. You have a career long habit here of presenting opinion as fact. Honestly, I'd prefer the childish insulting post to this non response.

Just sayin


ummm..if you read the thread you would see I supported everything with nothing but facts.....or did you miss all the stats I provided? The stats he provided were chosen selectively to support a point that is questionable at best. I provided the entire picture. It was easy to do...just look at all the great RBs.....some had long careers and some had short ones.....but heavy use is not a definitive kill switch for a RB. Only a very few select backs have long careers with big seasons repeatedly while many of the great backs, Walter Payton for example, had few or no seasons where they averaged 5 ypc and seasons where they were over 4.5 and under 4.5 mixed in throughout their career. Payton had a season of 4.8 in his 11th year.

Now if you read this thread and your take was that I was the one using opinion then I can't help you....everything I stated was taken from PFR so if that is the case than you think a reference site with nothing but stats is an opinion site.....good luck with that.

The reality of the entire issue was a media story that took a very small group and used it as a sweeping statement that is easily refuted when you look at a list of the highest single season rushing performance in NFL history and work backwards. Many backs have had a huge season early on and then had very productive careers while never reaching that summit again. When you run for 2000 yards in a season you will have a lot of carries...and every defense you face the next year is going to game plan for you...the schemes change...the personnel around them changes...there are so many factors....

If you want to check anything I presented you can easily got to pro_football_reference.com
mcnabbulous
Obviously Chip hasn't been factified by RF. laugh.gif

QUOTE
Finally, an interesting note from Kelly on Murray. He had an almost inconceivable 449 touches last year in Dallas—392 rushing, 57 receiving—and the road is littered with backs who couldn’t follow up a season with such pounding with more great years.
Kelly admitted it worries him.
“I think there is a lot of validity to it,” he said. “But how do you manage him going into a season? Our plan all along was to get another running back with him. I wanted to have two running backs, and that’s why we got Ryan [Mathews]. I don’t think you can have a guy carry it 370 to 400 times per season and be successful. We’re going to run it a lot—we always do—but we’ll have more than one guy doing it.”
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 17 2015, 09:55 AM) *
Obviously Chip hasn't been factified by RF. laugh.gif


I realize reading comprehension is a tough task for our resident NFL expert...I wish I knew what team your worked for in the past.....

I have never said I disagreed with Chip's handling of Murray...if you read my posts I merely pointed out that there are plenty of examples of backs who did not disappear the year after a heavy workload.....and many of those who did were a result of catastrophic injury. Obviously a heavy workload year after year is going to weigh heavily on any player at any position. My point is and has been that Murray does not have a history of a heavy workload, is in his 5 season with just one of heavy use and looking at history of good and/or great backs has as good a chance to have another good season. the common sense that the signing of Matthews indicates they have no plan to use Murray heavily again makes perfect sense.

Chip is a very intelligent coach.....he is also proactive.....his approach is no surprise....you contention is that none of that matters....if he was that concerned he would never have signed him to a big money contract.....or do you contend that Chip didn't know about Murray's workload last year before he gave him 18 million guaranteed? I think that might be a fact as well.....check that for me.....40 million over 5 years with 18 million guaranteed? Chip did sign him right? Is that a fact? Real concerned I guess.....or was that some other team?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Aug 17 2015, 10:07 AM) *
I realize reading comprehension is a tough task for our resident NFL expert...I wish I knew what team your worked for in the past.....

I have never said I disagreed with Chip's handling of Murray...if you read my posts I merely pointed out that there are plenty of examples of backs who did not disappear the year after a heavy workload.....and many of those who did were a result of catastrophic injury.

You literally haven't presented anything compelling to suggest this. Your presentation of "facts" is that guys often went on to have long careers where they met your arbitrary standard of satisfactory performance. In nearly every example, the guys performance dipped. The statistics in question indicate that a heavy workload results in a guy going from upper tier averages (4.5+ ypc) to a range that puts them on par with the mediocre backs in the league.

In some cases, the guys were out of the league within 2 years (e.g. Terrell Davis) or were compelled to retire at the top of their game (see: Tiki Barber)

There isn't one specific scenario that plays out across the board, but the simple fact is that either their careers are dramatically shortened or their performance dips to the extent that they go from excellent to mediocre very quickly.

QUOTE
Chip is a very intelligent coach.....he is also proactive.....his approach is no surprise....you contention is that none of that matters....if he was that concerned he would never have signed him to a big money contract.....or do you contend that Chip didn't know about Murray's workload last year before he gave him 18 million guaranteed? I think that might be a fact as well.....check that for me.....40 million over 5 years with 18 million guaranteed? Chip did sign him right? Is that a fact? Real concerned I guess.....or was that some other team?

Yes, Chip did sign him. He also isn't going to use him the way any other team in football would have done so. The Cowboys used him irresponsibly last year.

Frankly, I didn't like the signing. Especially at that price. I do believe if there is one team that will be able to salvage anything from the rest of his career, it will be the Eagles (because of their forward thinking approach to sports medicine.)

If Murray were on the Cowboys this year, I would fully expect his average to dip closer to 4.0, him to have an injury plagued season, or his career to be all but over within the next 2 seasons. In Philly, I don't know what to expect because we have a coaching staff that is more responsible.

There is literally no case study for a guy switching teams like this after a season like Murray just had. There is also no case study for Chip's sports science being used on a guy that just had a season like this.

All that said, I don't think any RB should really carry the ball more than 300 times in a season. I think 280 is probably a more optimal number.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Aug 17 2015, 12:36 PM) *
You literally haven't presented anything compelling to suggest this. Your presentation of "facts" is that guys often went on to have long careers where they met your arbitrary standard of satisfactory performance. In nearly every example, the guys performance dipped. The statistics in question indicate that a heavy workload results in a guy going from upper tier averages (4.5+ ypc) to a range that puts them on par with the mediocre backs in the league.

In some cases, the guys were out of the league within 2 years (e.g. Terrell Davis) or were compelled to retire at the top of their game (see: Tiki Barber)

There isn't one specific scenario that plays out across the board, but the simple fact is that either their careers are dramatically shortened or their performance dips to the extent that they go from excellent to mediocre very quickly.


Yes, Chip did sign him. He also isn't going to use him the way any other team in football would have done so. The Cowboys used him irresponsibly last year.

Frankly, I didn't like the signing. Especially at that price. I do believe if there is one team that will be able to salvage anything from the rest of his career, it will be the Eagles (because of their forward thinking approach to sports medicine.)

If Murray were on the Cowboys this year, I would fully expect his average to dip closer to 4.0, him to have an injury plagued season, or his career to be all but over within the next 2 seasons. In Philly, I don't know what to expect because we have a coaching staff that is more responsible.

There is literally no case study for a guy switching teams like this after a season like Murray just had. There is also no case study for Chip's sports science being used on a guy that just had a season like this.

All that said, I don't think any RB should really carry the ball more than 300 times in a season. I think 280 is probably a more optimal number.


You crack me up...you actually think you are a football guru..

Now the upper range is 4.5 ypc? You made the idiotic statement that the elite backs average 5.o regularly...what happened to that? Would you like a list of HOF RBs who were regularly around 4? And I don't have any arbitrary standard , I go by the stats of the highest paid RBs in the league...see how that works? The best RBs get the most money and that conincides with the guys hitting the 1000 yd mark whether you think that means anything or not. What is most amusing is that you feel if a guy has a great season one year and a good one the next he must be dropping off....in you infinite football wisdom you seem to miss scheme changes and defensive adjustments....which tells me your only experience playing the game is with your large ass on a couch playing Madden.

You didn't like the signing?...Does Chip know that? Poor Chip signed him to a 40 million dollar contract to do what?...run the ball 10 times a game?

Everyone thought he would get hurt last year but that did not happen.....No one debates that Chip will be more responsible and it will be no surprise if Murray has less than 300 carries and i agree it is a smart move.....I merely pointed out that many backs have had a season of heavy use and still went on to have great careers...that one season was not the death knell of their career and I provided examples....in many cases the RBs I presented went to the HOF of multiple Pro Bowls in those seasons that don't meet your arbitrary number of successful yardage for a RB...

But hey....I don't know shit...the coaches don't know shit...the former players who comment on the game don't know shit...the GMs who cut the checks don't know shit....


Only you know it.....great work.....sign me up for the newsletter
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.