might get cut in the near future? When the Cowboys traded with Seattle for their 3rd-string RB Christine Michael just a week prior to the start of the season, I thought that meant bad news for either Lance Dunbar or Darren McFadden. But with all the smokescreen buildup to the season opener against the Giants -- the 'Boys' staff constantly talking about RB-by-committee with Randle and DMAC, which was only magnified by numerous, conflicting reports about Randle and DMAC being the week 1 starter -- I started to think DMAC might have a significant role in the backfield.
But once we got through the 1st Q of that Giants game, it was obvious that Randle is the lead back, that Dunbar was the 3rd-down and empty-backfield target, and that DMAC does not appear to be an integral part of the offense.
I mean, Randle (19 touches) and Dunbar (8 touches) subbed in and out for each in 9 of Dallas's 11 offensive series in the entire game, with DMAC getting 7 touches in just 2 series (1 series in the 2nd Q, and 1 series in the 4th Q).
To me, it seems possible, maybe likely that Dallas grabbed Michael to come in, learn the offense, show them something in practice, and then move him into a more expanded role that they had hoped DMAC would provide. I'd normally say its too early to jump to such a conclusion (and I haven't come to the conclusion just yet) but the combination of the timing of the Michael trade, the disbursement of playing time/roles on Sunday, the fact that with Michael on board Dallas is currently carrying 5 backs (4 RBs, and the FB Clutts who they also like on special teams), and lastly that Dallas also has sudden depth issues at DL/DE and WR -- all of it seems to suggest that DMAC's career in Dallas may be short-lived.
Conversely, maybe Dallas will keep 5 backs, and let DMAC and Michael battle it out for 3rd string, keeping the loser of that battle for insurance against injury. For some reason, this does not seem as likely to me, but maybe that's the plan.
Thoughts?
But once we got through the 1st Q of that Giants game, it was obvious that Randle is the lead back, that Dunbar was the 3rd-down and empty-backfield target, and that DMAC does not appear to be an integral part of the offense.
I mean, Randle (19 touches) and Dunbar (8 touches) subbed in and out for each in 9 of Dallas's 11 offensive series in the entire game, with DMAC getting 7 touches in just 2 series (1 series in the 2nd Q, and 1 series in the 4th Q).
To me, it seems possible, maybe likely that Dallas grabbed Michael to come in, learn the offense, show them something in practice, and then move him into a more expanded role that they had hoped DMAC would provide. I'd normally say its too early to jump to such a conclusion (and I haven't come to the conclusion just yet) but the combination of the timing of the Michael trade, the disbursement of playing time/roles on Sunday, the fact that with Michael on board Dallas is currently carrying 5 backs (4 RBs, and the FB Clutts who they also like on special teams), and lastly that Dallas also has sudden depth issues at DL/DE and WR -- all of it seems to suggest that DMAC's career in Dallas may be short-lived.
Conversely, maybe Dallas will keep 5 backs, and let DMAC and Michael battle it out for 3rd string, keeping the loser of that battle for insurance against injury. For some reason, this does not seem as likely to me, but maybe that's the plan.
Thoughts?
