Joseph Randle cut and suspended for four games (2 Viewers)

[FGITLOTR]

after all that smack talk from randle during the offseason he ended up leaving so much on the field. i cant remember him breaking a single tackle. murray would have had 100+ rushing yards and a td with those same carries.

Not sure what game you were watching, but the Dallas line wasn't dominating the line of scrimmage...I do agree Murray breaks a few tackles but Randle still had a decent showing

 

[Indy Speedway]

Dunbar looked like the best back. Even tho I have Randle and want him to assert himself, I can't ignore Dunbar's performance.

Do you realize that Dunbar did not have a single carry? He was used exclusively in the passing game.

 

[georg013]

I knew someone would come in here with the classic...he looked ok but....

 

[stbugs]

I thought he'd do better... but not bad and with Dez out he should trend up. Dunbar looked very good catching the ball.

I thought Randle looked good as well. He looked really quick on the 25 yarder and made a fantastic one handed catch on a ball Romo threw behind him and he got the corner. He caught all three of his targets for 42 yards. Unfortunately, the game didn't unfold well for him. He was in on the goal line and they called a play action that worked, so no chance. Also, at the end of the game when they were behind they went with Dunbar (split out as a WR many times).

He's not Murray, but I can't see how anyone could say he didn't look good. As posted above, the run blocking didn't really look like the OL we heard about in the off season. They blocked well, but there were no gaping holes.

As a Randle owner, I was pretty happy with his performance from my RB2 slot and with Dez out, I think he'll catch a few more balls. McFadden looked like the McFadden I remember and I don't see him as a threat. Who'd have thought that after being saddled with Randle/Sankey (have Michael/Dunbar as well and Dunbar could end up being startable) would look so bad before Sunday and actually pretty nice today?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

What were the other 3rd to 6th round adp choices and how'd they do to start the season? It's a good start out the gate.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

IMO Randle looked fine. I think he's perfectly capable of not being a weakness on that offense, but OTOH, to me, he didn't look like a major plus either. He looked quick to me but didn't run through contact most of the time. Michael is going to need to really bring the "wow" to unseat Randle IMO, because Randle looks like a fairly capable, if unexceptional, starting RB. McFadden isn't a threat at all, and it's pretty clear that Dunbar is a receiving specialist only.

 

[Chaos Commish]

The Dallas committee plan was on display and probably will be next week. Dunbar as 3rd and passing down back. He played well in that role. Randle as featured running back in the 1st and 3rd quarter, McFadden in the 2nd and 4th. Randle's only advantage minute wise in this committee is that he will stay on to finish drives that end the 1st and 3rd quarters. He did not play in the 4th quarter. He got two carries at the beginning of the 2nd in an ongoing drive.

Nothing happened to make me think Michael gets a uniform any time soon.

 

[MattFancy]

As a Randle owner, I didn't see anything that warranted any concern for him going forward. He didn't look great, but he did enough that he will be fine going forward. He's not going to be Demarco Murray, but he should be a decent flex play most weeks IMO.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The Dallas committee plan was on display and probably will be next week. Dunbar as 3rd and passing down back. He played well in that role. Randle as featured running back in the 1st and 3rd quarter, McFadden in the 2nd and 4th. Randle's only advantage minute wise in this committee is that he will stay on to finish drives that end the 1st and 3rd quarters. He did not play in the 4th quarter. He got two carries at the beginning of the 2nd in an ongoing drive.

Nothing happened to make me think Michael gets a uniform any time soon.

I think Randle was in on the drive that started the 4th. McFadden spelled him next drive, and then Dunbar played with Dallas down 10 and catch-up mode. If the Giants do what they're supposed to do then really Dallas ends up with 2 whole drives in the 4th, one with DMC, one with Dunbar. It was an unusual game. In a situation where Dallas has the lead in the 4th I think Randle could be in for bigger numbers.

 

[chad in Indy]

I thought he played just fine too. I would like to see him used more on the screens and passing routes out of the backfield. That is where I thought he looked the best.

 

[Uncle Grandpa]

after all that smack talk from randle during the offseason he ended up leaving so much on the field. i cant remember him breaking a single tackle. murray would have had 100+ rushing yards and a td with those same carries.

Not sure what game you were watching, but the Dallas line wasn't dominating the line of scrimmage...I do agree Murray breaks a few tackles but Randle still had a decent showing

This. I wasn't too impressed with their run blocking.

 

[Chaos Commish]

The Dallas committee plan was on display and probably will be next week. Dunbar as 3rd and passing down back. He played well in that role. Randle as featured running back in the 1st and 3rd quarter, McFadden in the 2nd and 4th. Randle's only advantage minute wise in this committee is that he will stay on to finish drives that end the 1st and 3rd quarters. He did not play in the 4th quarter. He got two carries at the beginning of the 2nd in an ongoing drive.

Nothing happened to make me think Michael gets a uniform any time soon.

I think Randle was in on the drive that started the 4th. McFadden spelled him next drive, and then Dunbar played with Dallas down 10 and catch-up mode. If the Giants do what they're supposed to do then really Dallas ends up with 2 whole drives in the 4th, one with DMC, one with Dunbar. It was an unusual game. In a situation where Dallas has the lead in the 4th I think Randle could be in for bigger numbers.

That goes to what I posted and he didn't get a 4th quarter touch or play after the continuing 3rd quarter drive he participated in, and he was done for the game. If McFadden is playing satisfactorily they likely stick to this plan, so he is scheduled to be the 4th quarter running back (finisher), not Randle. This felt obvious to me based on the timing of when Randle went to the bench. It felt scripted.

 

[Chaos Commish]

after all that smack talk from randle during the offseason he ended up leaving so much on the field. i cant remember him breaking a single tackle. murray would have had 100+ rushing yards and a td with those same carries.

Not sure what game you were watching, but the Dallas line wasn't dominating the line of scrimmage...I do agree Murray breaks a few tackles but Randle still had a decent showing

This. I wasn't too impressed with their run blocking.

Agreed. It could be way overrated.

 

[tricky92]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

 

[Avery]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

 

[tricky92]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

Horrible run defense making Randle look "fine" is not fine. His time is very limited as the starting RB for Dallas.

In my opinion.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

IMO, Randle isn't going to LOSE the job. Someone else (Michael) is going to have to TAKE it.

 

[Uncle Grandpa]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

Horrible run defense making Randle look "fine" is not fine. His time is very limited as the starting RB for Dallas.

In my opinion.

If that was horrible run defense then we saw even worse run blocking. McFadden averaged 2.7 per carry last night.

 

[MattFancy]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

McFadden looked more explosive gaining 2.7YPC?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

Horrible run defense making Randle look "fine" is not fine. His time is very limited as the starting RB for Dallas.

In my opinion.

More nice defensive matchups on the way: Philly, Atl, NO. Gets bumpy with NE/bye and then Seattle 2 weeks later after that and then a rough closing schedule with NYJ/@Buf, but lots of good matchups on the Dallas schedule.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

Bloom posted as much after the 2nd quarter. McFadden did look both faster and more powerful on his first carry. It wen for 8 yards. He had a couple 3 yard gains he made the most of. He looked good going 19 yards bending the corner and beating an angle on a reception over the middle. His 4th quarter touches were pretty bad though, not that there was anything he missed, but he seemed awkward, impatient, and still lacks vision. Randle was fine. Nothing he did separated himself from what I believe the committee plan is, nor did he hurt himself, not do I believe either back would have been better with the other backs touches. It is what it is.

 

[Avery]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

Horrible run defense making Randle look "fine" is not fine. His time is very limited as the starting RB for Dallas.

In my opinion.

If that was horrible run defense then we saw even worse run blocking. McFadden averaged 2.7 per carry last night.

I think the run defense was maybe the only thing the Giants didn't entirely suck at on defense last night. Not great but not as bad as I expected... fine.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Sell while you can. Cmike is coming

My big concern with Michael is still that he will come in and get goal line duty. It's crowded enough as it is, so I don't even see how they work him in, but no matter what if they do turn to him or not I could see him getting the GL work early on.

 

[tricky92]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

Horrible run defense making Randle look "fine" is not fine. His time is very limited as the starting RB for Dallas.

In my opinion.

If that was horrible run defense then we saw even worse run blocking. McFadden averaged 2.7 per carry last night.

Yes, and I said on a couple of his runs. Do you guys watch games or just read box scores?

 

[MattFancy]

I just don't really see how Dallas can handle Randle/McFadden/Dunbar/Michael. There just isn't enough work to go around and you hamper one of them trying to get into any sort of rhythm. I think Michael could have value once the inevitable McFadden injury happens or if McFadden continues to only get 2.7ypc. Until then, I don't see where Michael would fit in.

Dunbar has a clear role as the passing down back. Randle looks to be the lead of the RBBC with McFadden mixing in every few drives. Unless the Cowboys plan to run the ball 30 times a game, I just don't see where Michael comes in.

 

[tricky92]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

Bloom posted as much after the 2nd quarter. McFadden did look both faster and more powerful on his first carry. It wen for 8 yards. He had a couple 3 yard gains he made the most of. He looked good going 19 yards bending the corner and beating an angle on a reception over the middle. His 4th quarter touches were pretty bad though, not that there was anything he missed, but he seemed awkward, impatient, and still lacks vision. Randle was fine. Nothing he did separated himself from what I believe the committee plan is, nor did he hurt himself, not do I believe either back would have been better with the other backs touches. It is what it is.

This is a fair assessment of the game. I would agree with everything you wrote here.

 

[chad in Indy]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

Disagree with this completely. Randle got what was there on numerous drives. I would have been more worried if I saw him constantly bouncing it outside. That was what I was scared would happen. I thought he did well to get 4 yds by pushing the pile, when there was no hole to be had. McFadden had a couple good runs, but they weren't special. He only had one run over 3 yds.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Sell while you can. Cmike is coming

My big concern with Michael is still that he will come in and get goal line duty. It's crowded enough as it is, so I don't even see how they work him in, but no matter what if they do turn to him or not I could see him getting the GL work early on.

It is very unlikely that Dallas suits up 4 backs. Escpecially with a DL injury and another on suspension and now a wr injury. A fourth back is not getting a uniform. Michael is going to have to wait for an injury, really poor production, or a change in Dallas roster dynamics.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

He also said...

Ryan Gong ‏@ryangong

@SigmundBloom DMC and Randle not looking terrible and looks like a full on committee anyways. Drop CMike for a wk2WW stud if this continues?

Sigmund Bloom ‏@SigmundBloom 14h14 hours ago

Sigmund Bloom retweeted Ryan Gong

If things don't change tonight, open to dropping CMike for Moncrief/JaJones/Dorsett/Stevie/DavJohnson/Eifert types

 

[JFS171]

The Dallas committee plan was on display and probably will be next week. Dunbar as 3rd and passing down back. He played well in that role. Randle as featured running back in the 1st and 3rd quarter, McFadden in the 2nd and 4th. Randle's only advantage minute wise in this committee is that he will stay on to finish drives that end the 1st and 3rd quarters. He did not play in the 4th quarter. He got two carries at the beginning of the 2nd in an ongoing drive.

Nothing happened to make me think Michael gets a uniform any time soon.

I think Randle was in on the drive that started the 4th. McFadden spelled him next drive, and then Dunbar played with Dallas down 10 and catch-up mode. If the Giants do what they're supposed to do then really Dallas ends up with 2 whole drives in the 4th, one with DMC, one with Dunbar. It was an unusual game. In a situation where Dallas has the lead in the 4th I think Randle could be in for bigger numbers.

That goes to what I posted and he didn't get a 4th quarter touch or play after the continuing 3rd quarter drive he participated in, and he was done for the game. If McFadden is playing satisfactorily they likely stick to this plan, so he is scheduled to be the 4th quarter running back (finisher), not Randle. This felt obvious to me based on the timing of when Randle went to the bench. It felt scripted.

That's a mischaracterization of their usage. It wasn't a 1:1 committee; it was 2:1 in favor of Randle. Randle handled the first 2 DRIVES, which happened to occur in the first quarter and bleed over into the 2nd. McFadden handled the third drive, which Dallas only had the ball once in the second quarter (if I'm remembering correctly).

Then Randle came on for 2 more drives, then McFadden for one. Would've been Randle again (he was up on the sideline with his helmet on), but they went pass-happy on the game winning drive.

Dunbar handled all obvious passing situations, but the RB committee was 2:1 in favor of Randle. Saying McFadden was the 2nd and 4th quarter back is just inaccurate.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Sell while you can. Cmike is coming

My big concern with Michael is still that he will come in and get goal line duty. It's crowded enough as it is, so I don't even see how they work him in, but no matter what if they do turn to him or not I could see him getting the GL work early on.

It is very unlikely that Dallas suits up 4 backs. Escpecially with a DL injury and another on suspension and now a wr injury. A fourth back is not getting a uniform. Michael is going to have to wait for an injury, really poor production, or a change in Dallas roster dynamics.

I personally think that the chances that McFadden either gets hurt or just plays his way out of being active are actually pretty high. YMMV.

 

[Milkman]

McFadden sucks

 

[Uncle Grandpa]

If that was horrible run defense then we saw even worse run blocking. McFadden averaged 2.7 per carry last night.

Yes, and I said on a couple of his runs. Do you guys watch games or just read box scores?

I watched the game. I saw things differently than you. Are you here for a discussion or just have everyone bow down to your awesome opinion?

 

[stbugs]

The Dallas committee plan was on display and probably will be next week. Dunbar as 3rd and passing down back. He played well in that role. Randle as featured running back in the 1st and 3rd quarter, McFadden in the 2nd and 4th. Randle's only advantage minute wise in this committee is that he will stay on to finish drives that end the 1st and 3rd quarters. He did not play in the 4th quarter. He got two carries at the beginning of the 2nd in an ongoing drive.

Nothing happened to make me think Michael gets a uniform any time soon.

I think Randle was in on the drive that started the 4th. McFadden spelled him next drive, and then Dunbar played with Dallas down 10 and catch-up mode. If the Giants do what they're supposed to do then really Dallas ends up with 2 whole drives in the 4th, one with DMC, one with Dunbar. It was an unusual game. In a situation where Dallas has the lead in the 4th I think Randle could be in for bigger numbers.

That goes to what I posted and he didn't get a 4th quarter touch or play after the continuing 3rd quarter drive he participated in, and he was done for the game. If McFadden is playing satisfactorily they likely stick to this plan, so he is scheduled to be the 4th quarter running back (finisher), not Randle. This felt obvious to me based on the timing of when Randle went to the bench. It felt scripted.

That's a mischaracterization of their usage. It wasn't a 1:1 committee; it was 2:1 in favor of Randle. Randle handled the first 2 DRIVES, which happened to occur in the first quarter and bleed over into the 2nd. McFadden handled the third drive, which Dallas only had the ball once in the second quarter (if I'm remembering correctly).

Then Randle came on for 2 more drives, then McFadden for one. Would've been Randle again (he was up on the sideline with his helmet on), but they went pass-happy on the game winning drive.

Dunbar handled all obvious passing situations, but the RB committee was 2:1 in favor of Randle. Saying McFadden was the 2nd and 4th quarter back is just inaccurate.

I agree. It was 19 to 7 in touches. Randle wasn't in at the end because of lead the Giants got. Dunbar replaced Randle when it was passing mode. McFadden gave Randle a breather and I saw nothing from him that I didn't think Randle did as well or better. I was impressed with Dunbar, but I think Dunbar/Randle will both be getting a lot more PPR work with Bryant out (see NO without Graham).

 

[unckeyherb]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

Horrible run defense making Randle look "fine" is not fine. His time is very limited as the starting RB for Dallas.

In my opinion.

More nice defensive matchups on the way: Philly, Atl, NO. Gets bumpy with NE/bye and then Seattle 2 weeks later after that and then a rough closing schedule with NYJ/@Buf, but lots of good matchups on the Dallas schedule.

Philly has one of the best front 7 in the league. I'd be wary of starting him for that game. Add in the loss of Dez and I'm concerned.

 

[stbugs]

As a Randle owner, I didn't see anything that warranted any concern for him going forward. He didn't look great, but he did enough that he will be fine going forward. He's not going to be Demarco Murray, but he should be a decent flex play most weeks IMO.

Decent flex play? He was in at the goal line, but didn't get a TD and yet his PPR points (I only play PPR) were on pace to be the #10 RB. If this was his just fine game, then he will be a solid RB2, which I assume is where highest point of where most folks drafted him. In PPR especially, I think his receptions last night, coupled with Bryant's injury could make for a really nice season for him. I have Randle/Dunbar/Michael in one league and the thing I got out of last night was that I wasn't worried about McFadden, which was my biggest worry.

 

[stbugs]

Anyone who thinks Randle looked fine is kidding themselves. He looked sluggish and a bit indecisive (unless the there was a huge hole in front of him). He's not a game-changer. I actually thought McFadden looked much more explosive on a couple of his runs.

I'm not sure you understand what "fine" means as it relates to a football player.

It doesn't mean he's a "game-changer" and it doesn't mean he's terrible. It means he did the job just fine - not great and not terrible.

Horrible run defense making Randle look "fine" is not fine. His time is very limited as the starting RB for Dallas.

In my opinion.

More nice defensive matchups on the way: Philly, Atl, NO. Gets bumpy with NE/bye and then Seattle 2 weeks later after that and then a rough closing schedule with NYJ/@Buf, but lots of good matchups on the Dallas schedule.

Philly has one of the best front 7 in the league. I'd be wary of starting him for that game. Add in the loss of Dez and I'm concerned.

I think Bryant being out may help him. I think he and Dunbar could catch a lot of balls while Dez is out.

 

[MattFancy]

As a Randle owner, I didn't see anything that warranted any concern for him going forward. He didn't look great, but he did enough that he will be fine going forward. He's not going to be Demarco Murray, but he should be a decent flex play most weeks IMO.

Decent flex play? He was in at the goal line, but didn't get a TD and yet his PPR points (I only play PPR) were on pace to be the #10 RB. If this was his just fine game, then he will be a solid RB2, which I assume is where highest point of where most folks drafted him. In PPR especially, I think his receptions last night, coupled with Bryant's injury could make for a really nice season for him. I have Randle/Dunbar/Michael in one league and the thing I got out of last night was that I wasn't worried about McFadden, which was my biggest worry.

Guess I'm erring on the side of caution a bit. I don't think being a RB2 for the season is out of the question. But until we see more games, I don't think there's anything wrong with plugging him in as a flex.

 

[stbugs]

If that was horrible run defense then we saw even worse run blocking. McFadden averaged 2.7 per carry last night.

Yes, and I said on a couple of his runs. Do you guys watch games or just read box scores?

I watched the game. I saw things differently than you. Are you here for a discussion or just have everyone bow down to your awesome opinion?

Some people find it hard to be objective. I only have Randle in 1 of 3 leagues, so it isn't like I am all in on Randle, but I thought he showed promise and McFadden showed that he was the backup.

 

[stbugs]

As a Randle owner, I didn't see anything that warranted any concern for him going forward. He didn't look great, but he did enough that he will be fine going forward. He's not going to be Demarco Murray, but he should be a decent flex play most weeks IMO.

Decent flex play? He was in at the goal line, but didn't get a TD and yet his PPR points (I only play PPR) were on pace to be the #10 RB. If this was his just fine game, then he will be a solid RB2, which I assume is where highest point of where most folks drafted him. In PPR especially, I think his receptions last night, coupled with Bryant's injury could make for a really nice season for him. I have Randle/Dunbar/Michael in one league and the thing I got out of last night was that I wasn't worried about McFadden, which was my biggest worry.

Guess I'm erring on the side of caution a bit. I don't think being a RB2 for the season is out of the question. But until we see more games, I don't think there's anything wrong with plugging him in as a flex.

Agreed, depends on your lineup. I tend to draft more WR heavy early so RB2 for me tends to be a crap shoot. I was happy with Randle and definitely think from last night that he should be a solid RB2. I am assuming he will score a few times, so I think he can, barring injury, keep up a good RB2 pace in PPR. Before yesterday, I was worried he might end up being non-startable.

 

[MattFancy]

As a Randle owner, I didn't see anything that warranted any concern for him going forward. He didn't look great, but he did enough that he will be fine going forward. He's not going to be Demarco Murray, but he should be a decent flex play most weeks IMO.

Decent flex play? He was in at the goal line, but didn't get a TD and yet his PPR points (I only play PPR) were on pace to be the #10 RB. If this was his just fine game, then he will be a solid RB2, which I assume is where highest point of where most folks drafted him. In PPR especially, I think his receptions last night, coupled with Bryant's injury could make for a really nice season for him. I have Randle/Dunbar/Michael in one league and the thing I got out of last night was that I wasn't worried about McFadden, which was my biggest worry.

Guess I'm erring on the side of caution a bit. I don't think being a RB2 for the season is out of the question. But until we see more games, I don't think there's anything wrong with plugging him in as a flex.

Agreed, depends on your lineup. I tend to draft more WR heavy early so RB2 for me tends to be a crap shoot. I was happy with Randle and definitely think from last night that he should be a solid RB2. I am assuming he will score a few times, so I think he can, barring injury, keep up a good RB2 pace in PPR. Before yesterday, I was worried he might end up being non-startable.

Yup. I went WR heavy and Randle is my RB2 as well. I was pleased with what I saw. If he can get you between 12-15 points a week, I'll take that.

 

[Chaos Commish]

The Dallas committee plan was on display and probably will be next week. Dunbar as 3rd and passing down back. He played well in that role. Randle as featured running back in the 1st and 3rd quarter, McFadden in the 2nd and 4th. Randle's only advantage minute wise in this committee is that he will stay on to finish drives that end the 1st and 3rd quarters. He did not play in the 4th quarter. He got two carries at the beginning of the 2nd in an ongoing drive.

Nothing happened to make me think Michael gets a uniform any time soon.

I think Randle was in on the drive that started the 4th. McFadden spelled him next drive, and then Dunbar played with Dallas down 10 and catch-up mode. If the Giants do what they're supposed to do then really Dallas ends up with 2 whole drives in the 4th, one with DMC, one with Dunbar. It was an unusual game. In a situation where Dallas has the lead in the 4th I think Randle could be in for bigger numbers.

That goes to what I posted and he didn't get a 4th quarter touch or play after the continuing 3rd quarter drive he participated in, and he was done for the game. If McFadden is playing satisfactorily they likely stick to this plan, so he is scheduled to be the 4th quarter running back (finisher), not Randle. This felt obvious to me based on the timing of when Randle went to the bench. It felt scripted.

That's a mischaracterization of their usage. It wasn't a 1:1 committee; it was 2:1 in favor of Randle. Randle handled the first 2 DRIVES, which happened to occur in the first quarter and bleed over into the 2nd. McFadden handled the third drive, which Dallas only had the ball once in the second quarter (if I'm remembering correctly).

Then Randle came on for 2 more drives, then McFadden for one. Would've been Randle again (he was up on the sideline with his helmet on), but they went pass-happy on the game winning drive.

loo

Dunbar handled all obvious passing situations, but the RB committee was 2:1 in favor of Randle. Saying McFadden was the 2nd and 4th quarter back is just inaccurate.

Huh. It didn't feel like a mischaracterization when I watched the game, looked through the play by play and typed my opinion, but looking at it again you could have this right. It actually went 2:1:1 right through the gamebook. Two for Randle, one for Darren, one for Lance. Situation dictated the series Dunbar started, so yup. This is more likely a 2:1 split for Randle and McFadden will get the breather carries when needed too. It felt scripted at the quarter changes, but that's less likely than 2:1. Thanks.

 

[Interseptopus]

I owned Murray last year and Randle this year. TBH, yesterday's game looks an awful lot like it did when Murray was there. The big differences are

1- the OL did not dominate like they did for Murray

2- Murray took more advantage of his carries last year vs Randle did last night (again, how much is that related to the OL too)

At the end of the day, all this talk about McFadden and Dunbar... It is really just all noise. Last year Dunbar was in on passing downs. Last year Randle spelled Murray for a series or two. The biggest differences are above.

So, if you are looking for the back to own, it's Randle. If you are in PPR and want someone as a what the heck flex, maybe Dunbar has some value. McFadden holds as much value as Randle did last year. If you owned Murray last year, yesterday's game breakdown for playing time was almost identical

 

[Biabreakable]

Early on Randle put the ball on the ground but the refs called it down by contact. Dallas runs a play quickly and there is no challenge.

Randle looked pretty smooth on his first catch. He had to turn around for the ball but is able to quickly spin and accelerate downfield after the one handed catch. He gets low and delivers a blow at contact with 2 defenders getting an extra 2 yards to extend for the 1st down.

A couple 4 yard runs where he gets what is blocked. Then a run to the left on the outside where he gets good blocking. 77 gets downfield and destroys 55. Randle runs behind him for 15 yards. Randle hops out of a leg tackle before falling forward for the extra 5 yards. He makes an excellent one handed catch that he had to turn around for in the 3rd quarter as well.

There was a rotation of series between the 3 RB and Dunbar got the last two as the Cowboys were in a trail situation passing the ball every down.

McFadden looked good on his first series, particularly on a catch he made cross the middle of the field for a 1st down. He did not do much on the second series he was in the game.

Randle consistently got the yards blocked for him and a little more at the end from finishing runs. One of the later runs he had, I noticed a wide open cut back lane that he doesn't try. I am not sure if he sees it or not. He runs the play where it was designed. I think he could have had a big run if he had cut it back the other way due to the blocking.

Randle did not look so good on one of his pass protection attempts.

There were a couple plays where Randle and Dunbar were on the field, with Dubbar split out as a WR.

 

[JFS171]

Early on Randle put the ball on the ground but the refs called it down by contact. Dallas runs a play quickly and there is no challenge.

Randle looked pretty smooth on his first catch. He had to turn around for the ball but is able to quickly spin and accelerate downfield after the one handed catch. He gets low and delivers a blow at contact with 2 defenders getting an extra 2 yards to extend for the 1st down.

A couple 4 yard runs where he gets what is blocked. Then a run to the left on the outside where he gets good blocking. 77 gets downfield and destroys 55. Randle runs behind him for 15 yards. Randle hops out of a leg tackle before falling forward for the extra 5 yards. He makes an excellent one handed catch that he had to turn around for in the 3rd quarter as well.

There was a rotation of series between the 3 RB and Dunbar got the last two as the Cowboys were in a trail situation passing the ball every down.

McFadden looked good on his first series, particularly on a catch he made cross the middle of the field for a 1st down. He did not do much on the second series he was in the game.

Randle consistently got the yards blocked for him and a little more at the end from finishing runs. One of the later runs he had, I noticed a wide open cut back lane that he doesn't try. I am not sure if he sees it or not. He runs the play where it was designed. I think he could have had a big run if he had cut it back the other way due to the blocking.

Randle did not look so good on one of his pass protection attempts.

There were a couple plays where Randle and Dunbar were on the field, with Dubbar split out as a WR.

I expect to see more of your last point this next month with no Dez. Dallas doesn't have another WR that can replace him... they're going to have to do it with the backs and the TEs (Gavin Escobar anyone?), and Dunbar puts stress on a defense as that moveable chess piece. That doesn't necessarily have to come with Randle off the field.

ETA - Randle recovered that ball he put on the ground early... idk how, but the referees sorted out the pile and pointed Dallas' way. I don't think that was a hurry up to avoid a challenge situation.

 

[Biabreakable]

Yeah I don't know if Street is a good option to replace Dez or how they will compensate for his loss. He was doing a very good job of blocking I noticed that will be hard to replace as well. Dunbar is not doing that for them. I only noticed Street on one play and he didn't do anything of note.

I was watching in condensed mode, so I didn't catch the details of the fumble. Just saw it was out and that they moved on quickly to the next play. I may have missed all the drama in between, where it was revealed that he recovered it. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[ahartig]

Jerry jones:

"The facts are as that game went, apart from that first drive, we departed from the way that you'll hopefully see the Cowboys play," Jones told "Shan & RJ" on Dallas-area 105.3 The Fan. "Now, every game, we'll have to make adjustments for what happens and other things could happen. But, for instance, I think Randle got about 10 or 15 or 16 carries, but you will probably see him in a normal game, and one that didn't go the way that one went, you'd probably see him up there at 22, 23, 24 carries."

My 120 yards and TD prediction didn't come true, but I think so far it's safe to say all of you who picked up Randle in the much later rounds before week 1 will be pleasantly surprised this year.

He also goes on to talk about McFadden and getting him more reps too.....

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This is an attempt at positive spin. I'm going to say no Romo, no Dez and maybe even no Witten (this week) means more carries and more red zone use (%_wise) for Randle.

I guess the negative spin is little passing threat, stalled drives and fewer red zone opportunities.

I can hang through McFadden rumors and the Michael trade, but this....

 

[Uncle Grandpa]

Randle ran hard this week and broke some tackles; something that people complained he wasn't doing in Week 1.

My only complaint this week was that he always seems to go where the play is designed. There doesn't seem to be an ability to make something out of nothing through cut-backs. You know he's got the burst and speed to rip off long runs. He just appears to need gaping holes in the defense in order to make it happen which the O-line isn't providing him right now.

 

[ourmanflint]

Its probably been pointed out in this thread but you can't underestimate the effect Callahan had on this run game.

Cowboys on pace to rush for 1512 yards this year. Last year they rushed for 2354 yards.

Redskins on pace to rush for 2744 yards this year. Last year they rushed for 1691.